Pew Discredits Gun-Grabbers

[2aguy]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

Such as?

infringing on MY rights?

No, just having more control over the guns and bullets, like, no lending your gun, serial numbers on bullets to trace them back to the actual owner... Closing all the gun show loopholes... There are other more radical things like fingerprint safety, meaning only the fingerprint belonging to the owner can activate the gun... I have no problem with legal gun owners, but we need to break the link between gun manufacturers and evildoers, because the evildoers always seem to have guns from legal manufacturers. Is there something we can do to break that link?

Gun show loophole? There isn't one....every licensed dealer has to do a background check no matter where they sell guns.

Checks for private property sales.....one, it is none of the governments business, two, the felon already knows they can't buy the gun and if we catch them with the gun they can already be arrested, then you guys refuse to lock them up for 30 years.....three, crimnals steal their guns....so background check fails....criminals get guns from straw buyers who can pass background checks.....so the check fails wether it is from a licensed dealer or a private sale...

So you have no real solution.....

Smart guns...don't work......

The criminals steal guns moron........or they get them from straw buyers......

 

[2aguy]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

So long as cops the military and the Government have firearms crooks will.

That makes no sense.

Really? Weapons are stolen from all military and police sources routinely. The National Guard is very much a target of firearms thefts. Further so long as other Countries make firearms they are easily smuggled into this Country across our porous southern border and by ship and aircraft.

When I was in the National Guard we had a remote assembly location....we had about 7 racks of M-16 Rifles, some with 203 Grenade Launchers, and M60 Machine guns.....guarded by unarmed national guardsmen.......ripe for the taking for anyone with the balls to do it....

 

[2aguy]

It's not clear to me what "gun-grabber" means:

1. Does it mean people who "grab" a gun to shoot another individual in response to that individual's having, in the "grabber's" mind, committed against them great or small wrongs, real and/or imagined?
2. Does it mean people who want to "grab" the guns that are held in the public sphere?

At some points in your OP, it seems you mean the former, at others, the latter.

Pew Discredits Gun-Grabbers

How the hell is it that you explicitly mention a Pew remark yet not one of your links in the OP takes one directly to original documentation of the alleged discrediting by Pew?

the impossible task of disarming criminals

The task of disarming (with regard to guns) criminals is impossible to achieve only if one defines the goal of doing so as disarming 100% of criminals of 100% of the access they might have to guns. It does not take 100% disarmament to effect a reduction in gun-related crime, deaths and injuries.

Democrat gun-grabbers spent decades trying to sell the lie that the Founders had criminals in mind when they included the Second Amendment in the Bill Of Rights.

I haven't seen credible and sound arguments from Democrats that asserts crime prevention is what the Founders had in mind by including among the BoR the 2nd Amendment. On the contrary, it's gun ownership advocates, typically conservatives, who proffer the crime and self-defense against it line of argumentation, most often of late citing Heller as they do so.

The gun-grabbers are united behind one political strategy. Criminals are the problem.

I'm not sure how to respond to this because of the risibly ambiguous term "gun-grabber."

• If "gun-grabber" means gun rights advocates, you are correct in that they near universally argue that crime prevention and self-defense is a key reason the general public and they in particular need to have guns.
• If "gun-grabber" means gun control advocates, they are right in that criminal use of guns is the gun problem that needs to be attenuated.

In light of the above, there is no question that criminals are a problem cited by individuals and groups on both sides of the 2nd Amendment debate.

Hollywood created the false premise way back in the black & white movie era:

There is not one Hollywood movie that I know of where the plot dealt with the reason for the Second Amendment; a screenplay where guns defended against the federal government. Turning the constitutional reason for guns into a defense against criminals was the message Hollywood Communists put out —— with great success I might add.​

​

The emboldened clause is among the most balmy things I've seen written on USMB. As a movie that directly, expressly and from a legal theory standpoint took on interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and the notion of "original intent," there probably aren't any widely viewed Hollywood movies of that nature. There are quite a few Hollywood movies that tacitly extol the virtues of gun ownership and their responsible/just use:

• Red Dawn -- High school kids in Michigan fight off communist invaders from Cuba.
• Gran Torino -- An aging Clint Eastwood saves his neighbors from gangbangers.
• The Hateful Eight -- Tarantino’s newest. EVERYBODY will be armed to the teeth!
• The Alamo -- No gun control in the 1830s, especially for the Mexicans.
• Shooter -- Arguably the best conspiracy theory movie since Parallax View.
• Lawless -- Essentially Bonnie and Clyde with even more guns.
• Justified -- A TV show.
• Dirty Harry
• Zombieland
• Big Jake -- Yes, even John Wayne gets in on the game.
• Fallout -- Another TV series, but it's clearly one that presents positively the use of guns against tyranny.
• The Last Ship -- A TV series that presents positively the use of guns against tyranny.

There is also no shortage of movies, including from the "black and white" era of film that portray the use of guns in the United States' seminal struggle against governmental tyranny. Then there are the movies -- all of them from the "black and white" era -- that while fewer in number nonetheless positively portray gun use in various fights against governmental tyranny and excess in various contexts associated with the battles that solidified the Revolutionary War win.

• The Buccaneer (1938)
  
• Captain Caution (1940) -- In the midst of the war of 1812, a British frigate fires upon a peaceful, unwitting mercantile ship. In the attack, the trader's captain is killed and the British take the surviving crew prisoner, including sailor Dan Marvin (Victor Mature) and the late captain's willful daughter Corunna Dorman (Louise Platt). In captivity, Marvin and Corunna form an uneasy alliance and, along with the other prisoners, plot an escape. Their goal: Reclaim their ship and avenge the murder of their captain.
  
• Mutiny (1952)
  
• Brave Warrior (1952)
  
• The Buccaneer (1958)

The scope of what you know of or don't know of is of no value to you or anyone one else. You really need to do more of something -- read more, get out more, etc. -- something whereby you make an effort to find out whether what you know of or don't know of is in fact the limit of what exists or has ever existed.

The lie did not escape the man who lies about everything:

Taqiyya the Liar ——making a lot of noise for the press —— will be satisfied if he reinforces the lie that the Second Amendment is about criminals​

Who is Taqiyya the Liar? I'm aware of the Islamic concepts of taqiyya -- a notion that allows for, in certain circumstances, lying to non-believers in God and Islam -- but I have no idea of what person you have in mind when you write "Taqiyya the Liar." Whoever it is, they at least need to be Muslim for the "pseudonym" you've assigned to be fitting.

From your post....

It does not take 100% disarmament to effect a reduction in gun-related crime, deaths and injuries.

Answer these questions then....

How do you lower the gun crime rate 75%?

How do you lower the gun murder rate 49%?

How do you lower the violent crime rate 72%?

Answer to all 3 ......you have more Americans buy and carry guns.....so....we already did what you wanted...

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400 million guns in private hands and over 15.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...

-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[Divine Wind]

Calm don Ned, no one is going to take your toys

Unless he moves to California. Now that Hillary lost, we're safe for a few years.

 

[guno]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

So long as cops the military and the Government have firearms crooks will.

That makes no sense.

Really? Weapons are stolen from all military and police sources routinely. The National Guard is very much a target of firearms thefts. Further so long as other Countries make firearms they are easily smuggled into this Country across our porous southern border and by ship and aircraft.

When I was in the National Guard we had a remote assembly location....we had about 7 racks of M-16 Rifles, some with 203 Grenade Launchers, and M60 Machine guns.....guarded by unarmed national guardsmen.......ripe for the taking for anyone with the balls to do it....

National Guard

dress up guys on the weekend

 

[2aguy]

From the the Pew study:

• "44% of U.S. adults say they personally know someone who has been shot, either accidentally or intentionally, and about a quarter (23%) say they or someone in their family have been threatened or intimidated by someone using a gun. Half see gun violence as a very big problem in the U.S. today, although gun owners and non-owners offer divergent views on this.

• "Gun owners and non-owners are also deeply divided on several gun policy proposals, but there is agreement on some restrictions, such as preventing those with mental illnesses and those on federal watch lists from buying guns. Among gun owners, there is a diversity of views on gun policy, driven in large part by party affiliation."

• "Two-thirds of gun owners say protection is a major reason they own a gun. By comparison, about four-in-ten (38%) cite hunting as a major reason and three-in-ten cite sport shooting, including target shooting, trap and skeet. Fewer point to a gun collection (13%) or to their job (8%) as being central to why they own a gun. To be sure, for many gun owners, these reasons overlap: 44% offer more than one major reason for owning a gun."

​

• "Of the many possible safety precautions gun owners could take when they live with children in the home, three receive majority support from both non-owners and those who currently own a firearm. Nearly all gun owners (95%) believe that talking to children about gun safety is essential, followed by 66% who say all guns should be kept in a locked place when there are children living in the home, and 59% who say gun owners who are parents should take a gun safety course...When asked about their own habits, roughly half of gun owners with children under 18 living at home say all of the guns in their home are kept in a locked place (54%) and all are unloaded (53%). Many gun owners with children say at least some of their guns are kept unlocked and loaded. In fact, 30% of these gun owners say there is a gun that is both loaded and easily accessible to them all of the time when they’re at home."

​

• "Solid majorities of both gun owners and non-owners favor limiting access to guns for people with mental illnesses and individuals who are on the federal no-fly or watch lists (82% or higher favor among each group). In addition, strong majorities favor background checks for private sales and at gun shows (77% among gun owners and 87% among non-owners)."

• Other charts from the study.

​

Now out of all of that, particularly the red text, how do you arrive at the conclusion that criminals and protection from them and their deeds is an argument advanced by "gun-grabbers?" You wrote, "The gun-grabbers are united behind one political strategy. Criminals are the problem."​

From your post.....from the Pew poll...

• "Solid majorities of both gun owners and non-owners favor limiting access to guns for people with mental illnesses and individuals who are on the federal no-fly or watch lists (82% or higher favor among each group). In addition, strong majorities favor background checks for private sales and at gun shows (77% among gun owners and 87% among non-owners)."

The problem with each one of those mentioned....the people are uninformed on what they are actually asking to be done...for example....

The federal no fly list....is a violation of due process......you can't just strip Rights away from people by having a burueacrat put them on a list......so anyone, gun owner or not.....who advocates this doesn't know what they are talking about...

Background checks? Again, gun owners or not, it doesn't mean they understand the issue. The only reason the anti-gunners want background checks for private sales is it makes banning guns in the future easier.....you will need to register all guns in order to track private gun sales....otherwise you will never know who the original owner of the gun was.....

Also....criminals steal guns or they use a straw buyer to get the gun...both methods make current federal background checks ....And checks on Private sales useless...since a stolen gun isn't getting a background check, and a straw buyer can pass any background check, licensed sale or private sale....

So these polls are pretty useless when the respondents don't understand the details...

 

[2aguy]

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

So long as cops the military and the Government have firearms crooks will.

That makes no sense.

Really? Weapons are stolen from all military and police sources routinely. The National Guard is very much a target of firearms thefts. Further so long as other Countries make firearms they are easily smuggled into this Country across our porous southern border and by ship and aircraft.

When I was in the National Guard we had a remote assembly location....we had about 7 racks of M-16 Rifles, some with 203 Grenade Launchers, and M60 Machine guns.....guarded by unarmed national guardsmen.......ripe for the taking for anyone with the balls to do it....

National Guard

dress up guys on the weekend

Hey asshole...tell their families that ...

Fallen Heroes

SGT Roger D. Rowe, age 54, of Bon Aqua, 1174th Transportation Company, was killed by a sniper in Iraq on July, 9, 2003

SSG David L. Loyd, 44, of Jackson, 1175th Transportation Company, experienced severe chest pain while on a mission and was pronounced dead at a Kuwait hospital on August 5, 2003.

SSG Nathan J. Bailey, 46, of Nashville, 1175th Transportation Company, died in Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, from a non-hostile gunshot wound November 12, 2003.

SGT Paul W. Thomason, III, 37, of Talbot, G Troop, 2nd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when a roadside bomb was detonated near his heavy equipment truck in a supply convoy outside of Kirkuk, Iraq, March 20, 2005.

SFC Stephen C. Kennedy, 35, of Oak Ridge, D Troop, 1st Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed along with another Soldier when their patrol was attacked by enemy forces using small arms fire in Balad Rus, Iraq, on April 4, 2005.

SGT Alfred B. Siler, 33, of Duff, Support Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, died when his humvee hit another vehicle in Tuz, Iraq, May 25, 2005.

SFC Mark O. Edwards, 40, of Unicoi, 2nd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, died from a non-combat related cause at his forward operating base near Tuz, Iraq, June 9, 2005.

SGT James Dustin Carroll, 23, of McKenzie, Company A, 230th Engineering Battalion, was killed when an Improvised Explosive Device detonated near his vehicle, near Baghdad, Iraq, on July 31, 2005.

SSG Asbury F. Hawn, II, 35, of Lebanon, Troop I, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was attacked by hostile fire while on mounted patrol August 13, 2005, near forward operation base Bernstein, Iraq.

SGT Shannon D. Taylor, 30, of Smithville, Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was attacked by hostile fire while on mounted patrol August 13, 2005, near forward operation base Bernstein, Iraq.

SGT Gary Lee Reese, Jr., 22, of Ashland City, Company M, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was attacked by hostile fire while on mounted patrol August 13, 2005, near forward operation base Bernstein, Iraq.

SSG Victoir Patric Lieurance, 34, of Seymour, Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when a roadside bomb detonated near his humvee during patrol operations in Samarra, Iraq, on August 22, 2005.

SGT Joseph D. Hunt, 27, of Sweetwater, Howitzer Battery, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when a roadside bomb detonated near his humvee during patrol operations in Samarra, Iraq, on August 22, 2005.

SGT Robert Wesley Tucker, 20, of Hilham, Troop K, 3rd Squadron, 278th Regimental Combat Team, was killed when an improvised explosive device exploded near his vehicle while on a combat patrol near Ad Dujayl, Iraq, October 13, 2005.

CW3 William Timothy Flanigan, 37, of Milan, Troop R., 4th Squadron, 278th Armored Calvary Regiment, was killed in Kandahar, Afghanistan, when his AH-64 Apache helicopter crashed near the Kandahar Airport, July 2, 2006.

SGT Dustin Daniel Laird, 23, of Martin, 913th Engineer Company, was killed when an improvised explosive device exploded near his vehicle August 1, 2006, near Rawah, Iraq.

SGT Stephen R. Maddies, 41, of Elizabethon, 473rd Counter-Rocket Artillery and Mortar unit, died of wounds suffered from enemy small-arms fire in Baghdad, Iraq, July 31, 2007.

1LT William Eric Emmert, 36, of Fayetville, 269th Military Police Company, was killed in Mosul, Iraq, while participating in a local Iraqi Police function, February, 24, 2009.

SGT David Clay Prescott, Jr., 40, of Murfreesboro, 278th Armored Cavalry Regiment, died on February 4, 2010, at Camp Shelby, Mississippi while awaiting deployment to Iraq.

SSG Michael W. Tinsley, 49, of Jackson, 278th Armored Cavalry Regiment, died on February 10, 2010, at Camp Shelby, Mississippi, while awaiting deployment to Iraq.

CPT Marcus R. Alford, 28, of Knoxville, Troop C, 1/230th Air Cavalry Squadron, was one of two Soldiers killed when their OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter experienced a hard landing at Qayyarah Airfield West, 30 miles south of Mosul, Iraq, on February 21, 2010.

CW2 Billie Jean Grinder, 25, of Gallatin, Troop C, 1/230th Air Cavalry Squadron, was one of two Soldiers killed when their OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter experienced a hard landing at Qayyarah Airfield West, 30 miles south of Mosul, Iraq, on February 21, 2010.


2 Idaho National Guard soldiers killed, 1 severely wounded in Iraq

Two Idaho soldiers have been killed in Iraq and a third has been wounded, the U.S. Department of Defense said Saturday.

Spc. Nathan R. Beyers, 24, and Spc. Nicholas W. Newby, 20, died Thursday from injuries after insurgents attacked their convoy with an explosive in Baghdad.

Newby was from Coeur d'Alene, officials said. Beyers had been living in the Coeur d'Alene area before his deployment, but lived in Littleton, Colo. before that.



Officials said Staff Sgt. Jazon Rzepa, 30, of Idaho, suffered serious leg injuries in the attack. He has been taken to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany for treatment.

The soldiers were assigned to the 116th Cavalry Heavy Brigade Combat Team, based in Post Falls, Idaho.

Idaho National Guard spokesman Col. Tim Marsano said Beyers has been an Idaho resident for a number of years and that his wife, Vanessa Beyers, and daughter, born in November last year, live in the Coeur d'Alene area.


Pentagon calls up 10,000 National Guard for combat duty in Iraq - World Socialist Web Site

the Bush administration has been forced into the largest call-up of part-time National Guard troops for front-line combat operations since the Vietnam War. On September 26, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld authorised the Army to mobilise two 5,000-strong brigades of National Guard infantrymen for deployment to Iraq.

The North Carolina-based 30th Infantry Brigade (Mechanised), supplemented by a battalion from New York, was mobilised as of October 1. The Arkansas-based, 39th Infantry Brigade (Light), supplemented by a battalion from Oregon, will be mobilised on October 12.

 

[Flanders]

Upholding the Second Amendment has priorities.

1. Defense against government tyranny.

2. Self-defense against native criminals.

3. Self-defense against foreign enemies who come here to kill.

Listen to this guy Dave Ross doublespeak the primary reason the Founders gave us the Right to arm oiurselves. Ross turns the argument into a definition of tyranny. Ergo, today the Second Amendment is about criminals. You can bet that Ross puts original intent on the bottom of any list of priorities he creates:

VIDEO ▼

Radio host: Scalise shooter radicalized by Constitution

 

[Mudda]

Another example of the Paranoid Gun Crowd. Hopefully, the Feds get the mental-health-and-gun-ownership issue solved quickly.

All they have to do to fix that is ban liberals from getting guns. Problem solved. If it saves one child.....

If "liberals" agree to give up their guns, will you?

If left wingers give up their guns we won't have to....and the gun crime rate will disappear over night...

So that's a no, got it.

 

[Mudda]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

So long as cops the military and the Government have firearms crooks will.

That makes no sense.

Really? Weapons are stolen from all military and police sources routinely. The National Guard is very much a target of firearms thefts. Further so long as other Countries make firearms they are easily smuggled into this Country across our porous southern border and by ship and aircraft.

So you're not willing to try to keep guns out of criminals hands. Got it.

 

[Mudda]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

We already have......we have laws that say they can't buy, own or carry guns and they can be arrested if they commit a crime with one...then guys like you refuse to lock them up for 30 years when they get caught...the problem isn't on our end, the problem is on your end...

I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian.
So basically, you're not willing to try anything to stop criminals from getting guns. What's not working right now is good enough for you. Got it.

 

[miketx]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

We already have......we have laws that say they can't buy, own or carry guns and they can be arrested if they commit a crime with one...then guys like you refuse to lock them up for 30 years when they get caught...the problem isn't on our end, the problem is on your end...

I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian.
So basically, you're not willing to try anything to stop criminals from getting guns. What's not working right now is good enough for you. Got it.

you're a criminal terrorist.

 

[Mudda]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

We already have......we have laws that say they can't buy, own or carry guns and they can be arrested if they commit a crime with one...then guys like you refuse to lock them up for 30 years when they get caught...the problem isn't on our end, the problem is on your end...

I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian.
So basically, you're not willing to try anything to stop criminals from getting guns. What's not working right now is good enough for you. Got it.

you're a criminal terrorist.

How is that?

 

[Divine Wind]

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

So long as cops the military and the Government have firearms crooks will.

That makes no sense.

Really? Weapons are stolen from all military and police sources routinely. The National Guard is very much a target of firearms thefts. Further so long as other Countries make firearms they are easily smuggled into this Country across our porous southern border and by ship and aircraft.

So you're not willing to try to keep guns out of criminals hands. Got it.

Childish straw man argument.

More interested in defending myself and my property from attacks by miscreants than attacks by the government

So would you be for or against trying to do something so that the miscreants don't have such easy access to guns?

We already have......we have laws that say they can't buy, own or carry guns and they can be arrested if they commit a crime with one...then guys like you refuse to lock them up for 30 years when they get caught...the problem isn't on our end, the problem is on your end...

I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian.
So basically, you're not willing to try anything to stop criminals from getting guns. What's not working right now is good enough for you. Got it.

Childish straw man argument #2

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

 

[Mudda]

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.

 

[2aguy]

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.

The "status quo" lowered gun murder 49%.....gun crime 75%.....and violent crime 72%.......as Americans bought and carried more guns......

Locking up criminals would help lower it further.

 

[Mudda]

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.

The "status quo" lowered gun murder 49%.....gun crime 75%.....and violent crime 72%.......as Americans bought and carried more guns......

Locking up criminals would help lower it further.

We already went through this, the actual numbers are still extremely high and that doesn't bother you. You like being afraid so that you have a reason to pack. We get it.

 

[Divine Wind]

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.

The "status quo" lowered gun murder 49%.....gun crime 75%.....and violent crime 72%.......as Americans bought and carried more guns......

Locking up criminals would help lower it further.

We already went through this, the actual numbers are still extremely high and that doesn't bother you. You like being afraid so that you have a reason to pack. We get it.

What was that number again and what percentage were suicides? Black-on-black murders?

For Libertarians, not LWLs claiming to be Libertarians:
1.9 Self-Defense

The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights—life, liberty, and justly acquired property—against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. Private property owners should be free to establish their own conditions regarding the presence of personal defense weapons on their own property. We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership, manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition.

 

[2aguy]

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.

The "status quo" lowered gun murder 49%.....gun crime 75%.....and violent crime 72%.......as Americans bought and carried more guns......

Locking up criminals would help lower it further.

We already went through this, the actual numbers are still extremely high and that doesn't bother you. You like being afraid so that you have a reason to pack. We get it.

No...the numbers are this...9,616 gun murders....70-80% of the victims are criminals, and of the remaining, many are the friends and family of criminals....

400 million guns, 15.7 million people carrying guns...and the number of innocents actually murdered by criminals who can't buy, own or carry a gun is under 2,000.....cars killed 36,000 people in the same year......

 

[Mudda]

Kid, you can't be a "libertarian" while simultaneously advocating draconian gun control laws.

And you can't be a real human being if you're ok with the status quo.

Not advocating anything "draconian". Talk about strawman.

The "status quo" lowered gun murder 49%.....gun crime 75%.....and violent crime 72%.......as Americans bought and carried more guns......

Locking up criminals would help lower it further.

We already went through this, the actual numbers are still extremely high and that doesn't bother you. You like being afraid so that you have a reason to pack. We get it.

What was that number again and what percentage were suicides? Black-on-black murders?

For Libertarians, not LWLs claiming to be Libertarians:
1.9 Self-Defense

The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights—life, liberty, and justly acquired property—against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. Private property owners should be free to establish their own conditions regarding the presence of personal defense weapons on their own property. We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership, manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition.

It's impossible to oppose all laws... because the government already restricts our right to small arms only, when they have much more powerful weapons that we're not allowed to have. So you can't own a bazooka because the government says you can't. So keep pretending that you have some Constitutional right that you don't actually have. Try not to be so gullible, that's how they want you.