Common Sense Crime Prevention... or "How best to organize your community"

[PubliusInfinitum]

I admit that I am a liberal, but on the gun thing it’s not the place of the government to limit a law abiding citizen’s right to own a firearm.

My solution would be through personal responsibility on the part of the individuals owning guns, individuals using guns in the commission of a crime and the individuals selling guns.

For example, if you are a private individual that has your gun stolen you are now civilly (if not criminally) liable for the harms caused by that firearm due to your failure to adequately protect the public from the exercise of your 2nd amendment right. The individual still has the right to purchase the gun. There would be a presumption of negligence that the gun owner would need to overcome and we would apply a strict liability standard, just as we do to people in auto accidents, for harms caused by the firearm.

Similarly, if you are a retailer of firearms, in the event that a firearm is sold without the appropriate documentation or stolen, then civil liability for all harms caused by the firearm would be the responsibility of the seller, once again there would be a rebuttable presumption of negligence.

Indeed, the right to defend one's life, through the ownership and use of a fire arms does come with a sacred responsibility... the weight of which is substantial and which I believe is at the root of the problem.

But your argument is intentionally taking the responsibility to the absurd... which is conclusively established down the thread where you speak to the 'presumption of negligence.'

As another member has since pointed out, your rationalization turns US Jurisprudence upon its head, declaring that where a firearm is stolen and used in a crime, you want to project responsibility for that crime upon the gun owner, the RIGHTFUL CITIZEN, from whom the FIREARM WAS STOLEN.

Where there is a 'Presumption of Negligence' there can be no justice... as there is no potential for equity in the prosecution of Justice. The State is vastly more powerful than the individual, its resources incomparable to those of any citizen... Where the popular consensus turns to the State position being the presumptive truth, Equality is out the cultural window... and this argument represents such as is nearly always the case where left-think enters a calculation. Here we find the State coming to claim certain knowledge, based purely upon the occasion of circumstances, that the gun owner was negligent; thus the criminal that COMMITTED A CRIME, IN BURGLARIZING A DWELLING, STEALING PROPERTY THAT DID NOT BELONG TO HIM; VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY and DWELLING; the NON-RIGHTFUL criminal's action is rationalized..., it is all but excused and the RIGHTFUL, LAW ABIDING CITIZEN BECOMES THE CRIMINAL... turning justice on its head.

Equitable Justice requires the claimant of negligence prove negligence...

Thus the law must establish REASONABLE thresholds...

In this case, the law would require a device which is designed for self defense in circumstances which would in the event of a home invasion, require the timely delivery of that device to the home owner, where the timeline of minimum efficacy is a function of SECONDS, be locked away to the extent that the delivery of the device in time to produce the dired effect is rendered impossible. Thus the threshold for negligence is NOT reasonable; as it requires that the device be kept secured beyond the means of its intended function.

The presumption threshold required by left-think presumes that a thief will illegally enter a dwelling... and that the weapon is subject to THEFT, thus it should be locked away to prevent the theft and thus used to harm another, assessing blame for that harm onto the citizen who had the weapon stored IN THEIR HOME...

Consider the logical extensions of this assumption...

The left ASSUMES a person; a person who is by virtue of their actions, KNOWINGLY VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER, THUS IS NOT WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS , will illegally enter a dwelling for the purposes of removing property which is known to them to NOT BE THEIR PROPERTY... while at the SAME TIME the Left, being FULLY AWARE OF THE ABOVE requires that the device which a RIGHTFUL CITIZEN owns to defend themselves, their family and their property from NON-RIGHTFUL INDIVIDUAL(S) be locked away, rendered disabled for that purpose, despite THE PRESUMPTION THAT SUCH A CIRCUMSTANCE IS LIKELY...

Now... ask yourself... of those in question in the above discussion, who is taking responsibility? The Left knows full well, by virtue of the stated assumption that a dwelling is LIKELY to be invaded and by DEFAULT, demands that a firearm represents too great a public risk... knowing what RIGHTS are... how can this be?

The NON-RIGHTFUL THEIF is excused as a victim of culture, poverty, ignorance, blah, blah, blah... and the RIGHTFUL Citizen is assessed as being responsible for a crime which this NON-RIGHTFUL CITIZEN COMMITS DESPITE THE RIGHTFUL CITIZEN HAVING BEEN EGREGIOUSLY VIOLATED IN THE PROCESS OF THE CRIME IN QUESTION.

Thus to accommodate the NON-RIGHTFUL, the Left demands that the MEANS of THE RIGHTFUL TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM THE NON-RIGHTFUL BE RESTRICTED BY LAW; and this is accomplished by overtly establishing the threshold for Negligence so low that the MEANS TO EXERCISE THE RIGHT IS RENDERED IMPOTENT, rendering RIGHTFUL CITIZENS: to be WITHOUT A RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND TO BE SECURE IN THEIR HOMES AND EFFECTS... meaning where the citizen take measures to exercise their right to defend their very lives, as well as that of their family and their property through a firearm, they expose "THE PEOPLE" to a higher risk, than that presented BY THE THEIF WHO WILLFULLY VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. The Indiviual right is ignored, dissmissed and rejected, for the false right of the collective. When, in truth, the collective is protected by protecting the RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL.

In essence, the left is saying that you don't really have a right to defend your life and property... They're saying that because of poverty, ignorance and the host of excuses they lay out in various rationalizations, obscuring the violation of HUMAN RIGHTS... I.e.: 'that THESE POOR SOULS HAVE A RIGHT TO WHAT EVER THEY WANT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT MOST SACRED OF LEFTIST SACREMENTS... A NEED! Demonstrated perfectly by this post: [ http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...st-organize-your-community-11.html#post902262 ] which is typical of the Left-think and stands as a classic example of the basis in reasoning upon which the UK and Australian governments based their tyranny, in the disarming of their subjects/citizens.

There is a concerted effort in the UK to actually have Burglary and Mugging declared as a legitimate vocation. It is now virtually a crime in these nations to use force in defense of your life and property… Although at this point, they mouth the color of a right to self defense, but if a non-rightful person mugs you and is injured by you, the State will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law, on the basis that your actions were ‘offensive’… You have a right to surrender your property and run away… but if you strike the NON-RIGHTFUL PERSON… you are considered to be taking “OFFENSIVE” action.

And THAT is where this reasoning of ‘Presumptive Negligence of your Responsibilities…” will inevitably take you... It is absurdity stacked upon unbridled idiocy; standing in direct opposition to equitable Justice for All.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFL...

Isn't it cool how predictable the left is? When they're faced with refutation on such forums they prefer to pretend that it didn't happen...

LOL... Leftists...

10 hours and they can't find the time to respond... despite dozens of posts by the parties in question on numerous other threads.

 

[Chris]

ROFL...

Isn't it cool how predictable the left is? When they're faced with refutation on such forums they prefer to pretend that it didn't happen...

LOL... Leftists...

10 hours and they can't find the time to respond... despite dozens of posts by the parties in question on numerous other threads.

The facts speak for themselves.

We lead the developed world in gun deaths per capita. For you that is a good thing. For me it's a bad thing.

The deaths of 1,000,000 Americans is a tragedy.

 

[Turboswede]

But your argument is intentionally taking the responsibility to the absurd... which is conclusively established down the thread where you speak to the 'presumption of negligence.'

As another member has since pointed out, your rationalization turns US Jurisprudence upon its head, declaring that where a firearm is stolen and used in a crime, you want to project responsibility for that crime upon the gun owner, the RIGHTFUL CITIZEN, from whom the FIREARM WAS STOLEN.

Not really surprised that you disagree even though the same standard of negligence applies to cars, it shouldn’t apply to guns because people have a right to guns but not cars.

As 9% of guns used in crimes are stolen, can we apply strict liability to individuals who give or sell firearms to people who then use the weapon in the commission of a crime?

How about if we just apply it to former felons and those diagnosed as insane, or should the provider of a weapon have no responsibility for the actions undertaken by the criminal who received the weapon.

• So, If you have a drug dealer with no felony convictions go out and purchase a hand gun
  
• Sell the hand gun (with a significant mark-up) to a known felon
  
• The felon shoots a shopkeeper in the commission of a crime
  
• Should the Drug dealer have any responsibility for the shooting?
  
• If the Drug Dealer has assets, should the victim of the shooting be able to sue for damages?
  

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The facts speak for themselves.

We lead the developed world in gun deaths per capita. For you that is a good thing. For me it's a bad thing.

Yeah, I expect that FOR YOU that IS a 'bad thing... But the fact is we should lead the world in Gun deaths; we have a growing crap load of leftists, who don't give a damn and often do not even BELIEVE IN: THE GOD GIVEN HUMAN RIGHTS ON WHICH AMERICA WAS FOUNDED and Americans are well armed, well trained and natural marksmen...

The deaths of 1,000,000 Americans is a tragedy.

Well that WOULD BE TRUE, IF those 1 million you're speaking of were ALL AMERICANS... but the simple fact is the majority were nothing CLOSE to Americans, they were criminals intentionally violating the rights of AMERICANS and as such they had forfeited their human rights and needed killing; America is better off without them and what's more, we haven't even BEGUN to finish that job.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Not really surprised that you disagree even though the same standard of negligence applies to cars, it shouldn’t apply to guns because people have a right to guns but not cars.

And the same standard applied to cars is founded upon invalid logic and unsound reasoning... A CAR WHICH IS STOLEN IS NO LONGER IN THE POSSESSION AND CONTROL OF THE OWNER...


The THIEF has OVERTLY (look it up if you need to) deprived the owner of his vehicle; the thief has VIOLATED THE RIGHTS OF THE OWNER TO THE RIGHTFUL USE OF HIS PROPERTY and is thus FULLY, WHOLLY, SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE USE OF THAT CAR WHILE IT IS IN HIS POSSESSION!...

Now had the owner given the car, loaned the car, or otherwise lent his consent to the use of the car to a person that they REASONABLY BELIEVED OR SHOULD HAVE REASONABLY KNOWN THAT THE DRIVER IN QUESTION WAS NOT CAPABLE OF GOOD JUDGEMENT OR WAS PRONE TO POOR JUDGEMENT... THEN, at THE POINT... HE IS RESPONSIBLE.

As 9% of guns used in crimes are stolen, can we apply strict liability to individuals who give or sell firearms to people who then use the weapon in the commission of a crime?

ROFL... So we go from THEFT... to the giving or selling of a firearm... and we find that such is done as IF there is no discernable distinction... when in truth there IS NO SIMILARITY! Which is, of course, a function of DECEIT!; it is a purposeful attempt to blur the distinction between the valid responsibilities of Americans and the projected absurdities of the faux responsibilities the Left wants to use to advance "common sense regulations" towards disarming America and empowering the common criminal... all because where the CRIMINAL IS EMPOWERED THE LEFTIST IS EMPOWERED TO "FIX IT..."

How about if we just apply it to former felons and those diagnosed as insane, or should the provider of a weapon have no responsibility for the actions undertaken by the criminal who received the weapon.

Hey it's your idiocy, you apply it to anyone ya like... it's asinine drivel of the baseless variety; it's lies and obfuscation, dissembling and rationalization...

The weight of responsibility of the keeping and bearing of arms weighs heavy on every American... they damn well know what those responsibilities are and the ramifications of the use of their weapons... and being good people of strong conscience they do not envy those subject to their power and go to incredible lengths to avoid implementing same; and your attempt to lay upon them absurd restrictions which render their weapon useless and lay upon them responsibility on which they have no influence merely established you as little more than part of the problem and something well south of anything approaching an American.

• So, If you have a drug dealer with no felony convictions go out and purchase a hand gun
  
• Sell the hand gun (with a significant mark-up) to a known felon
  
• The felon shoots a shopkeeper in the commission of a crime
  
• Should the Drug dealer have any responsibility for the shooting?
  
• If the Drug Dealer has assets, should the victim of the shooting be able to sue for damages?
  

LOL... Drug dealer and felon huh?

Anyone that sells a gun to someone that they were REASONABLY sure to have known the person they sold that weapon too was not responsible, should be held accountable for that sale... TO THE DEGREE THAT THEIR REASONABLY CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE IS RELEVANT.

Where we part company is what a person should reasonably KNOW for certain...

Your scenario has a drug dealer legally buying a gun...

How'd that happen? He didn't have a criminal record... Right? Your claim however implies that the drug dealer is not responsible... by virtue of his drug dealing... YET HE LEGALLY PURCHASED THAT GUN, because HE DID NOT HAVE A RECORD OF DRUG DEALING OR ANY OTHER CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. SO the gun seller is not liable for any crime the drug dealer may commit with that gun because HE SOLD THE WEAPON WITH THE REASONABLE CERTAINTY THAT HE WAS A RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN.

But when the DRUG DEALER SELLS THAT GUN TO A FELON, DID HE DO SO KNOWING THE BUYER WAS A FELON? Ya didn't say... only noting the delta between that which the Seller bought and that which the seller sold the piece; which is to say HIS PROFIT from the sale. What difference does it make how much mark up he sold it for? Are you suggesting that the substantial mark up is an indication that the seller knew the buyer was not responsible? I get the impression that this is the SINGULAR POINT by which you're judging that the seller could be reasonably believed to know the seller was irresponsible or otherwise unsuitable.

If you could clear that up, that would be nice...

But without regard to ANY of that... THAT THE DRUG DEALER, SOLD THE GUN TO THE FELON DOES NOT MAKE THE DRUG DEALER LIABLE FOR THE MURDER...

His liability is limited to what HE IS REASONABLY EXPECTED TO HAVE KNOWN...

IF, for instance there is evidence that the seller KNEW that the buyer intended to kill the merchant... the seller is an accessory to murder. IF there is NOT evidence that the seller was privy to such, he cannot reasonably be held accountable for murder. At best he can only be held accountable for selling a gun to someone was not legally able to own a gun and THE depth of responsibility THERE must be measured against the means available to him, which would have potentially provided him with such information...

You want to project that the seller must assume ALL BUYERS are unsuitable... when in point of fact the vast majority of buyers are quite qualified, wholly suitable and perfectly within their rights to buy a gun from a private seller; just as MOST SELLERS are VERY AWARE OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO NOT SELL THEIR WEAPONS TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE COGNIZANT OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES AND ARE PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL... but you want to project such is not the case because DESPITE your claim to believe in the right to own a firearm, which comes with responsibility to secure that piece... you also believe that there are valid excuses for some people to violate the rights of the innocent and you need room to advance those excuses and its hard to do when those people are dropping dead from holes in their head, as a result of their poor career decisions...

At least that's my take on it...

 

[pegwinn]

No, you are just lying and now you are lying about your lying and being arrogant.

Meanwhile, the blood continues to flow....

That would be a personal insult levied against me.

Actually it figures out to be more than 1,000,000, but it will take me a bit of work to confirm that.

Fatal Firearm Injuries in the United States - NCIPC

I read your link. I never did find a definitive 1,000,000. I will cut you some slack on the grounds that you were not sure of yourself without a bit of work to confirm it. How'd it work out?

From your link:

During the 33-year period covered by this report, the total number of firearm deaths increased by 130%, from 16,720 in 1962 to 38,505 in 1994. If present trends continue, firearm-related injuries could become the leading cause of deaths attributed to injury by the year 2003, surpassing injuries due to motor vehicle crashes.

I'd say the alleged trend doesn't appear to have continued.

Again, from your link:

Current surveillance efforts need to be expanded to include information about nonfatal injuries. We also need a greater understanding of the causes of firearm deaths to identify modifiable individual and societal risk factors. Finally, further research is required to plan, develop, and evaluate prevention strategies.

After 33 years of data gathering they didn't plan or develop? Methinks their methodology needs work.

Personal insults will not bring back 1,000,000 dead Americans.

As the gun death statistics I posted show quite clearly, other countries do a much better job of preventing gun deaths than we do.

The record reflects that any flaming or personal insults were started by you. And, there is still no definitive link proving the 1 MegaDeaths by guns, whereas I linked to the auto fatality deaths.

Additionally, you may (in a moment of intellectual honesty) find this set of facts to be of interest.

Tag, you're it.

 

[Chris]

That would be a personal insult levied against me.



I read your link. I never did find a definitive 1,000,000. I will cut you some slack on the grounds that you were not sure of yourself without a bit of work to confirm it. How'd it work out?

From your link:


I'd say the alleged trend doesn't appear to have continued.

Again, from your link:


After 33 years of data gathering they didn't plan or develop? Methinks their methodology needs work.



The record reflects that any flaming or personal insults were started by you. And, there is still no definitive link proving the 1 MegaDeaths by guns, whereas I linked to the auto fatality deaths.

Additionally, you may (in a moment of intellectual honesty) find this set of facts to be of interest.

Tag, you're it.

I have presented the facts.

The United States leads the developed world in gun deaths....over 1,000,000 Americans killed since 1960.

You don't see this as a problem. I do.

That is the difference between us.

 

[Chris]

With more guns sold and registered per capita than anywhere in the U.S., Nevada is a gun state - always has been.

It also is the gun-death state. According to the Center for Disease Control, since 2000, Nevada has led the nation with an average of 26 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people.

War-torn Iraq averaged 32 gun deaths per 100,000 people last year, according to the same study.

At least once a year, an accidental gun death here makes national headlines.

Lives cut short

Northern Nevada's latest gun tragedy came Oct. 28.

Charles Coogan Kelly, 21, of Truckee, Derek Jensen, 23, of Reno, and Nathan Viljoen, 23, of Fallon, were all fatally shot after an argument erupted at the party in a quiet, neighborhood in southwest Reno.

Two 19-year-old Reno men, Samisone Taukitoku and Saili Manu, were arrested the next day on suspicion of robbery, assault with a deadly weapon and brandishing a firearm. Their bail was set at $500,000 each.

During his arraignment, Taukitoku was charged on three counts of murder with the use of a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon and coercion. He is being held without bail. Saili Manu also was arraigned on charges of coercion and assault with a deadly weapon.

Manu remained in custody in lieu of $500,000 cash bail. Taukitoku is accused of using a .380 semi-automatic pistol to shoot world-class snowboarder Kelly, University of Nevada, Reno student Jensen, and former UNR student Viljoen.

Police said Taukitoku, Manu and two teen relatives crashed a party at a Heatheridge Lane home rented by UNR students.

Robert Bell, Manu's attorney, said the pair went to the party to have fun, but when they arrived at the party, fights had broken out.

"Then, shots rang out, and three boys were dead," Bell said. "He's in shock, that's the best way to put it. The public needs to see where the real fault lies. He was not charged with murder."

Three dead from a Halloween party is just the latest case of guns cutting young lives short here.

On June 15, 2006, Zack Warren, 18, was accidentally shot and killed by friend Donald Davis at a house on River Road.

Investigators said Davis was playing with a .45-caliber handgun when he pointed it at Warren and pulled the trigger. The bullet struck Warren in the forehead and he died at the scene. Davis fled the home and was captured eight hours later in a North Carson Street lumber yard.

Sixteen months later, Davis is serving a four-year-plus term for involuntary manslaughter and felony possession of a firearm.

Nevada leads in gun deaths, ownership | NevadaAppeal.com

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

With more guns sold and registered per capita than anywhere in the U.S., Nevada is a gun state - always has been.

It also is the gun-death state. According to the Center for Disease Control, since 2000, Nevada has led the nation with an average of 26 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people.

War-torn Iraq averaged 32 gun deaths per 100,000 people last year, according to the same study.

In defense of the Iraq war... The terrorists are not particularly good shots and they've learned that if they SHOOT at Americans, the Americans who ARE exceptionally good shots will return that fire and frankly, THAT HURTS! So... you can understand how a fair reticence has developed and as a result, the terrorists developed a preference for improvised explosive devices...

Now do you have any data on the IED Death rates in Nevada? Now I don't have any research, but I have a feeling that Iraq MAY have the edge on Nevada in this area; what's more I think you'll find that the data on 'gun deaths' in Iraq is skewed with combat related deaths or 'war related deaths' being used; meaning that the data was probably not purely 'gun related deaths'... Now I base this upon my own personal experience, in that I attend a combat shooting school in Nevada once a year and that place is LOADED with guns and over the last 7 years, not a single death has occurred... what's more, during those periods I also attend a 'piss away my money' course at one of Nevada's premier towns, where they cater to and encourage hedonism and debauchery; now surely you can see that such a place would promote the potential for unprincipled, sub-intellects to be present and I have to tell you that I've not witnessed, nor have I seen any outward sign that I was in a war zone which on any level paralleled, say... Baghdad; which your data of Nevada's 26G.D./100k pop. being comparable to Iraq's 32 G.D./100kpop would indicate.

Perhaps you can dig into your data and tell us where in Nevada we might go to experience this mayhem... I'm sure some buddies of mine, along with myself would enjoy a field trip to this shooters paradise...

It would also be helpful to know if one is required to buy a license... are tags required? Is there a limit? If so, what are the parameters... Is there a season? If so, again, what are the particulars... I.E: Gang bangers of Hispanic origin... Black, white... Is it a point thing, where Black gang bangers are worth more or less points than say the Hispanic GB... naturally its understood that the taking of an upper-middle class white wigga-wanna-be garb'd in his 'colors' while driving his Dad's Lexus, while his oversize sub pounds out the soulful rhythms of his street rap would be heavily penalized... much the same as taking a fawn or doe...

At least once a year, an accidental gun death here makes national headlines.

Well that serves reason... It's the same way in Iraq. As most gun deaths in Iraq are not accidents...

Lives cut short

Northern Nevada's latest gun tragedy came Oct. 28.

Charles Coogan Kelly, 21, of Truckee, Derek Jensen, 23, of Reno, and Nathan Viljoen, 23, of Fallon, were all fatally shot after an argument erupted at the party in a quiet, neighborhood in southwest Reno.

Two 19-year-old Reno men, Samisone Taukitoku and Saili Manu, were arrested the next day on suspicion of robbery, assault with a deadly weapon and brandishing a firearm. Their bail was set at $500,000 each.

During his arraignment, Taukitoku was charged on three counts of murder with the use of a firearm, assault with a deadly weapon and coercion. He is being held without bail. Saili Manu also was arraigned on charges of coercion and assault with a deadly weapon.

Manu remained in custody in lieu of $500,000 cash bail. Taukitoku is accused of using a .380 semi-automatic pistol to shoot world-class snowboarder Kelly, University of Nevada, Reno student Jensen, and former UNR student Viljoen.

Police said Taukitoku, Manu and two teen relatives crashed a party at a Heatheridge Lane home rented by UNR students.

Robert Bell, Manu's attorney, said the pair went to the party to have fun, but when they arrived at the party, fights had broken out.

"Then, shots rang out, and three boys were dead," Bell said. "He's in shock, that's the best way to put it. The public needs to see where the real fault lies. He was not charged with murder."

ROFL... so you're changing the subject from gun accidents to criminal use of a firearm by sub-intellects destined to die early due to nature's general intolerance of idiocy. SLICK... but not near slick enough.

Now ya see, in Iraq... that would have never made the papers.

Three dead from a Halloween party is just the latest case of guns cutting young lives short here.

On June 15, 2006, Zack Warren, 18, was accidentally shot and killed by friend Donald Davis at a house on River Road.

Investigators said Davis was playing with a .45-caliber handgun when he pointed it at Warren and pulled the trigger. The bullet struck Warren in the forehead and he died at the scene. Davis fled the home and was captured eight hours later in a North Carson Street lumber yard.

Sixteen months later, Davis is serving a four-year-plus term for involuntary manslaughter and felony possession of a firearm.

Nevada leads in gun deaths, ownership | NevadaAppeal.com

Involuntary? LOL... HE POINTED A GUN AT A HUMAN BEING AND PULLED THE TRIGGER! I looked up 'voluntary' and this is a gross misuse of the word...

Again... you've a classic case of idiocy.

Do you have any data on 'idiocy deaths' in Nevada? Because it's becoming pretty clear that your problem is not GUNS, but one wherein those of sub-cognitive means have come into contact with a gun.

Perhaps Nevada should consider an IQ test and ban from citizenship, those who can't muster the cognitive means to overcome the heady calculation of the potential for death where one POINTS A .45 CALIBER APC AT A HUMAN BEING AND PULLS THE TRIGGER...

Here's a sample question:

Sam and Johnny are at a party and they come across a table upon which a .45 caliber Semi-automatic hand gun is sitting. Sam picks the weapon up and points it at Johnny's head: what are the odds that Johnny is going to die when Sam pulls the trigger?

A: 100%
B: 50%
C: How would I know I didn't get an invite?
D: I need to ask my Dad...

HEY! It occurred to me that maybe you'd like to take that test Chris. What fun! So what's the answer Chris? A, B, C, or D...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Can'tcha just see poor Chris stuck in her room with hundreds of wadded up sheets of paper piling up as she desperately tries to break the code...

ROFLMNAO... I just adore the last word.

 

[pegwinn]

I have presented the facts.

The United States leads the developed world in gun deaths....over 1,000,000 Americans killed since 1960. This is an example of an assertion. When you make an assertion, it is up to you to prove it.

You don't see this as a problem. I do.

That is the difference between us.

I do see it as a problem.

I also see deaths by auto as a problem.

Both are inanimate objects controlled by a human being. Thus banning or over regulating them is not logically consistent by anyone who is intellectually honest.

Our difference is that I default to individual civil liberty. You, as evidenced by your posting history, do not.

 

[Chris]

I do see it as a problem.

I also see deaths by auto as a problem.

Both are inanimate objects controlled by a human being. Thus banning or over regulating them is not logically consistent by anyone who is intellectually honest.

Our difference is that I default to individual civil liberty. You, as evidenced by your posting history, do not.

Preventing 1,000,000 needless deaths is not over regulation.

Other countries do a much better job of regulating guns. That is why we are number one in the developed world in gun deaths per capita.

Since you see these 1,000,000 gun deaths as a problem, what do you propose to do about it?

 

[WhiteLion]

Preventing 1,000,000 needless deaths is not over regulation.

Other countries do a much better job of regulating guns. That is why we are number one in the developed world in gun deaths per capita.

Since you see these 1,000,000 gun deaths as a problem, what do you propose to do about it?

Most dangerous gun is an unloaded gun, more accidental gun deaths occur because (I THOUGHT IT WAS UNLOADED?).
When infact they never rolled or ejected the chamber, is what's known in the old days as one over the hammer, or in Russia its accidental Russian Roulette..Click Click Bang Bang... People go out an buy a weapon without the slightest idea of what or how in hell to use it. The problem mainly lies in sales without a mandatory on site training period before taking possession. Weapons salesman should be forced to train and certify the people buying their merchandise for a said period of time this should be mandatory. This business of gun regulations(crimes of the few, gov. regulations for all MArxism BS) does nothing more than put the guns in the hands of blackmarket crime syndicates and the state, not in the hands of good law abiding citizens... Remember this if you remember nothing else on these message boards, if the government somehow abolishes "YOUR" 2nd Amendment rights we have lost all our rights hands down...
Here's what happened to 2 COPS that went on a call in NYC and was told not to bare weapons;
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMoq3t6zVNo[/ame]

And this ones for the fun of it; [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u33kbOjt7ZY&feature=related[/ame]

George Washington- Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon, and citizen's firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference; they deserve a place with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes; we need them every hour.
George Washington- Government is not reason, it is not eloquence. It is force, and like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

 

[DiveCon]

Most dangerous gun is an unloaded gun, more accidental gun deaths occur because (I THOUGHT IT WAS UNLOADED?).
When infact they never rolled or ejected the chamber, is what's known in the old days as one over the hammer, or in Russia its accidental Russian Roulette..Click Click Bang Bang... People go out an buy a weapon without the slightest idea of what or how in hell to use it. The problem mainly lies in sales without a mandatory on site training period before taking possession. Weapons salesman should be forced to train and certify the people buying their merchandise for a said period of time this should be mandatory. This business of gun regulations(crimes of the few, gov. regulations for all MArxism BS) does nothing more than put the guns in the hands of blackmarket crime syndicates and the state, not in the hands of good law abiding citizens... Remember this if you remember nothing else on these message boards, if the government somehow abolishes "YOUR" 2nd Amendment rights we have lost all our rights hands down...
Here's what happened to 2 COPS that went on a call in NYC and was told not to bare weapons;
YouTube - Ted Nugent on Police, Gun Control, & Democrats

George Washington- Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon, and citizen's firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference; they deserve a place with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes; we need them every hour.
George Washington- Government is not reason, it is not eloquence. It is force, and like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

i could see this being handled by a licensing system, take a class, be certified to purchase a class of gun
the NRA could develop and run such a class

 

[Octoldit]

1,000,000 Americans killed by guns since 1960.

Thanks NRA!

Stalin and Lenin killed more people than that in just six months. Don't be fooled the NWO Communist must be stopped. They have poisoned our food and water with fluoride, they fly over our cities polluting the air with the chemtrails, They were really one's behind 9-11 as a ploy to take away our freedom and rights.

They caused two wars based on the 9-11 acts of treason, and they have recently looted the treasury of another 700 billion in an bail out scheme. Americans need their weapons more than ever now. The international bankers that financed the bolshevik revolution are the same bankers of the so-called federal reserve and they are undermining the American Government; The Communist/Terrorist are the enemies within , and many have dual Israeli citizenship and are not true Americans, they are traitors and GWB is their puppet.

 

[pegwinn]

Preventing 1,000,000 needless deaths is not over regulation.

Other countries do a much better job of regulating guns. That is why we are number one in the developed world in gun deaths per capita.

Since you see these 1,000,000 gun deaths as a problem, what do you propose to do about it?

Regulation cannot be proven to prevent any deaths. I don't care what other countries do. And I originally posted the question to you. Courtesy requires that you answer first.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

i could see this being handled by a licensing system, take a class, be certified to purchase a class of gun
the NRA could develop and run such a class

That wouldn't work for me. I would not even CONSIDER filing for ANY firearm license by ANY governmental agency, for ANY reason.

I have a fundamental human right to own and use a firearm in defense of my life... I carry a firearm with me everywhere I go and do so unapologetically.

Licensing is nothing more than a means to lead the government directly to your door on that great day of reckoning when they determine that its time to disarm the public.

When you have to ask for permission, you've forfeited anything approaching a right.

 

[pegwinn]

I am ambivalent about registration..... I might even turn in the ones that are registered.....

 

[WhiteLion]

That wouldn't work for me. I would not even CONSIDER filing for ANY firearm license by ANY governmental agency, for ANY reason.

I have a fundamental human right to own and use a firearm in defense of my life... I carry a firearm with me everywhere I go and do so unapologetically.

Licensing is nothing more than a means to lead the government directly to your door on that great day of reckoning when they determine that its time to disarm the public.

When you have to ask for permission, you've forfeited anything approaching a right.

Pub watcha gonna do when they come for you?? like they did in New Orleans Louisana during Hurricane Katrina they confiscated all the weapons and some of them were never returned to their rightful owners???Governors of Miss and Alabama kept FEMA out for fear of a fullblown incidence ever heard of Directive 51??? google it or YouTube it...