Two Proud Gun Nuts Second-Amendment Each Other To Death In Road Rage Incident

[candycorn]

Societies without guns are safer than societies with guns. The facts speak for themselves.

As for the politics of it, gun policy is pretty much the last thing I consider since gun nuts and their candidates usually don't make it onto the National Stage and are quickly laughed off of it. That being said, as an American it is sad. Lets say you're from another planet and you're looking at one society with a high standard of living where you can buy weapons and they have our number of gun deaths every year and you look at another society across a body of water (in either direction pretty much) and they have pretty much the same standard of living without the gun deaths. You would ask yourself why; are Americans just more homicidal than Japanese or Chinese or French or Germans? Surely that isn't the reason, is it?

And after a little investigating, you find out that there is this 200+ year old law that was written before the invention of zippers or street lights that we choose to live by and suffer nearly monthly tragic shootings as a result.

Someday, perhaps when America is no longer around and someone else is writing about our history, that 2nd Amendment will be the "What in the hell were they thinking" question asked of all who study our history.

Really? Mexico, Every country in Central and South America (save Costa Rica and Belize) to name a few have major limits on who can own weapons and their crime rate is higher than ours. You should at least do a modicum of research before you make an ass of yourself......ooops. Too late.

Must be another polite gun owner

I was talking about advanced nations with police forces and the like

Oh, you mean those countries that managed to kill off their violent youth in their millions? Those countries?

Try again. That didn't make sense.

I'll make it simple for you. Europe has suffered through two world wars. Those wars killed millions of their most aggressive young men. The US didn't.

So the Swiss should have all sorts of mass murderers since they didn't lose millions of people. But somehow, they don't. I'm sure you'll have some other bizarre explanation for that; it can't be more comical than blaming our epidemic of gun deaths on the fact that we didn't lose enough people during world wars; as if the 80 year old veterans are running around killing folks.

Furthermore the US is being gifted with a massive influx of people from those very same "non advanced" countries you ignore in the violence figures. You see dear silly person the very violent people that populate those "non-advanced" countries are the very same ones who are committing the vast majority of the violence .....HERE!

Yeah, we should deport all of the white folks.

 

[westwall]

Really? Mexico, Every country in Central and South America (save Costa Rica and Belize) to name a few have major limits on who can own weapons and their crime rate is higher than ours. You should at least do a modicum of research before you make an ass of yourself......ooops. Too late.

Must be another polite gun owner

I was talking about advanced nations with police forces and the like

Oh, you mean those countries that managed to kill off their violent youth in their millions? Those countries?

Try again. That didn't make sense.

I'll make it simple for you. Europe has suffered through two world wars. Those wars killed millions of their most aggressive young men. The US didn't.

So the Swiss should have all sorts of mass murderers since they didn't lose millions of people. But somehow, they don't. I'm sure you'll have some other bizarre explanation for that; it can't be more comical than blaming our epidemic of gun deaths on the fact that we didn't lose enough people during world wars; as if the 80 year old veterans are running around killing folks.

Furthermore the US is being gifted with a massive influx of people from those very same "non advanced" countries you ignore in the violence figures. You see dear silly person the very violent people that populate those "non-advanced" countries are the very same ones who are committing the vast majority of the violence .....HERE!

Yeah, we should deport all of the white folks.

The Swiss aren't being invaded by millions upon millions of people from those "non developed" countries you speak so disparagingly of. I bet you didn't know that the illegal population here in the US is FOUR TIMES larger than the entire population of Switzerland. I'll say this for you...when you go stupid, you go all out.

 

[candycorn]

Must be another polite gun owner

I was talking about advanced nations with police forces and the like

Oh, you mean those countries that managed to kill off their violent youth in their millions? Those countries?

Try again. That didn't make sense.

I'll make it simple for you. Europe has suffered through two world wars. Those wars killed millions of their most aggressive young men. The US didn't.

So the Swiss should have all sorts of mass murderers since they didn't lose millions of people. But somehow, they don't. I'm sure you'll have some other bizarre explanation for that; it can't be more comical than blaming our epidemic of gun deaths on the fact that we didn't lose enough people during world wars; as if the 80 year old veterans are running around killing folks.

Furthermore the US is being gifted with a massive influx of people from those very same "non advanced" countries you ignore in the violence figures. You see dear silly person the very violent people that populate those "non-advanced" countries are the very same ones who are committing the vast majority of the violence .....HERE!

Yeah, we should deport all of the white folks.

The Swiss aren't being invaded by millions upon millions of people from those "non developed" countries you speak so disparagingly of. I bet you didn't know that the illegal population here in the US is FOUR TIMES larger than the entire population of Switzerland. I'll say this for you...when you go stupid, you go all out.

I talk about building the wall every time the subject comes up so I really don't know who you think you are lecturing. The fact of the matter is that the wall will do nothing to make us safer; it merely limits the payloads that can be carried across. While it's not a cure-all, it is important to limit those payloads. All of the 9/11 hijackers came into the nation legally...the wall would have done zippo to prevent the worst attack in the history of the nation.

Showing pictures of Latinos means what? That some get arrested? Sure. Some will get arrested tomorrow along with some white folks, some black folks, some men, some women, some Asians, some teens, some middle aged people, some baby boomers, and yes even some geriatric folks.

Just like in Switzerland. The difference is that in Switzerland, all of the above do not have easy access to as many weapons as they can afford or steal. In our country, they do. Blaming world wars for our high homicide rates was batshit crazy, blaming latinos for it is just as crazy.

Time to move on to another minority group now I guess.

 

[August West]

I like how guno used "2nd Amendment" as a verb lol

who is this hysterical fairy and why is he anti gun? must be an Obamatard.

Obamatard? You`re making a good case for why 10 year olds shouldn`t be allowed to play with guns.

 

[Brain357]

What does that have to do with anything? This country has 320 million people. It doesn't have to have happened to me to have happened to millions of others.

I love how people who illegally obtain firearms and use them in a criminal manner are seemingly ignored by the left but if someone has a concealed carry permit it means they're Jesus Christ with a handgun and they BETTER NOT do a damn thing the slightest bit wrong or it means IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ALL GUNS FROM ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS BECAUSE IF THIS ONE DID THIS, THEY ALL WILL.

Uh no, there are idiots with concealed carry permits too. Statistics show they are by far the safest group of gun owners, however.

So you haven't. The 2 million number he throws around iust isn't possible based on ownership and crime rates. It is dishonest how he acts like its a fact when it's not even possible.

 

[Brain357]

Now you jump back into fantasy land. Your 2 million is made up.

Who is killed by guns each year:
20k suicides, owner
8500 homicides, innocent victim
500 accidents, usually owner
230 criminals in defense

By far guns kill the owner. It is more a suicide machine than anything else.

It is more a suicide machine than anything else

No...the Japanese, South Koreans, and Chinese have no access to guns and kill themelves at 2 times our rate....so they have 40,000 suicides without any gun involved.......

and 2 million people stop violent crime each year..........

We only have like 1.5 million violent crimes each year and gun owners are a minority. Your 2 million claim is just silly.

No, you have 1.5 million reported crimes.....another 2 million are stopped by armed Americans......

I have 12 studies that say it's less than 2 million. How many you have?

All 16 say the number is at or above 764,000 incidents...and the study commissioned by the Clinton Justice Department, designed and executed by 2 anti gun extremists found the number was 1.5 million times a year....

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million
(Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf)

And that was just one of the studies with numbers that high.....

And here are all the ones you ignore that are over 1 million...because they defeat your argument....

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Then adjust the 764k for today's numbers and start saying 500k. Your 2 million makes you look silly when the vast majority of studies say it is less and it's not even mathematically possible.

 

[2aguy]

you really ought to quit pretending your goal is public safety, You hate gun owners because most of us don't vote for say idiots like Hillary clinton

Societies without guns are safer than societies with guns. The facts speak for themselves.

As for the politics of it, gun policy is pretty much the last thing I consider since gun nuts and their candidates usually don't make it onto the National Stage and are quickly laughed off of it. That being said, as an American it is sad. Lets say you're from another planet and you're looking at one society with a high standard of living where you can buy weapons and they have our number of gun deaths every year and you look at another society across a body of water (in either direction pretty much) and they have pretty much the same standard of living without the gun deaths. You would ask yourself why; are Americans just more homicidal than Japanese or Chinese or French or Germans? Surely that isn't the reason, is it?

And after a little investigating, you find out that there is this 200+ year old law that was written before the invention of zippers or street lights that we choose to live by and suffer nearly monthly tragic shootings as a result.

Someday, perhaps when America is no longer around and someone else is writing about our history, that 2nd Amendment will be the "What in the hell were they thinking" question asked of all who study our history.

No, societies that ban guns and are police states and have a culture of peaceful submission to authority have lower crime rates......the biggest......police states, and submission to authority......

Again, guns aren't the issue....

 

[2aguy]

[
So you agree a society without guns is safer than a society with guns?

a society without sex has less STDs than one with it

lets stick to reality and real scenarios

a society without guns is one where strong young men rule and women and the elderly have no ability to resist. being a black belt with years of knife training, a gun free society would make me a lot more powerful than I am now. an armed society is a polite society , women wouldn't want a society without guns

Gee, strangely enough, Angela Merkel and Margaret Thatcher both were able to head governments of societies that had few guns on the streets.

And the Germans murdered 12 million innocent people, and the British have 2 times the violent crime rate as the United States, and they tell their citizens they must quietly submit to violent attack or face prosecution.....

Do you want that?

 

[Brain357]

[
So you agree a society without guns is safer than a society with guns?

a society without sex has less STDs than one with it

lets stick to reality and real scenarios

a society without guns is one where strong young men rule and women and the elderly have no ability to resist. being a black belt with years of knife training, a gun free society would make me a lot more powerful than I am now. an armed society is a polite society , women wouldn't want a society without guns

Gee, strangely enough, Angela Merkel and Margaret Thatcher both were able to head governments of societies that had few guns on the streets.

And the Germans murdered 12 million innocent people, and the British have 2 times the violent crime rate as the United States, and they tell their citizens they must quietly submit to violent attack or face prosecution.....

Do you want that?

It doesn't look like germany will be doing that again. Was that even in your lifetime? You can't let an abomination of history guide your every thought.

 

[Brain357]

[
So you agree a society without guns is safer than a society with guns?

a society without sex has less STDs than one with it

lets stick to reality and real scenarios

a society without guns is one where strong young men rule and women and the elderly have no ability to resist. being a black belt with years of knife training, a gun free society would make me a lot more powerful than I am now. an armed society is a polite society , women wouldn't want a society without guns

Gee, strangely enough, Angela Merkel and Margaret Thatcher both were able to head governments of societies that had few guns on the streets.

And the Germans murdered 12 million innocent people, and the British have 2 times the violent crime rate as the United States, and they tell their citizens they must quietly submit to violent attack or face prosecution.....

Do you want that?

You realize that germany thing happened before cable TV, smart phones, and the internet right? It couldn't happen now.

 

[Brain357]

Sounds like the wild wild west, its a draw. Road rage is becoming rampant it seems. One never knows when a wacko is going to draw a gun on you. Really I don't know why anyone but a crook would carry a gun, and then it should be illegal. I am anti guns.

In answer to your question...people carry guns for self defense...here is why....

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use A Methodological Experiment - Springer




Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

*********************************
And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....
Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

********************

So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....

***********************

http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/
In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.
When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.

Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women.

However,more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm.

They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight! ]
Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.
The results?
In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.
Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.
5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.
Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.
In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)
The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.
Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.

And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....

Self-defense with guns The consequences

This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...

http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf

Here is Clinton's actual gun study...the number of 1.5 million is on page 9
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf

I'm not sure you are even doing your math correctly. There are 15 studies because the CDC did not do a study on DGUs as you have been corrected on many times. So when I average them I get about 1.6 million. Adjusted for today's crime rates it's probably a million. If you removed the la times cause it doesn't seem to exist and the field cause it's not national, add in the ncvs and adjust for today's crime rates it is under a million. You'd do those things if you wanted to be accurate.

 

[turtledude]

Obamatard? You`re making a good case for why 10 year olds shouldn`t be allowed to play with guns.

sadly for you I was able to carry loaded weapons in federal courthouses and on planes.

you're a gun banning retard

 

[turtledude]

The rate of gun violence among white Americans-the racial group that has the most gun ownership per capita IS LOWER Than the rate of gun violence of whites in most-if not all-of the Eurosocialist effete societies that ban or restrict handgun ownership. THE HIGHEST rate of gun violence in the USA comes from blacks-who not only have low rates of LEGAL Gun ownership-but generally live in DEMOCRAT controlled cities with stupid gun control laws

 

[Brain357]

The rate of gun violence among white Americans-the racial group that has the most gun ownership per capita IS LOWER Than the rate of gun violence of whites in most-if not all-of the Eurosocialist effete societies that ban or restrict handgun ownership. THE HIGHEST rate of gun violence in the USA comes from blacks-who not only have low rates of LEGAL Gun ownership-but generally live in DEMOCRAT controlled cities with stupid gun control laws

Link?

 

[MathewSmith]

I am usually a compassionate person, however this is one instance that leaves me feeling only disgust. Stupid, ignorant people can shoot at one another all day long, but do it where innocent bystanders can't be hurt or killed!

 

[turtledude]

The rate of gun violence among white Americans-the racial group that has the most gun ownership per capita IS LOWER Than the rate of gun violence of whites in most-if not all-of the Eurosocialist effete societies that ban or restrict handgun ownership. THE HIGHEST rate of gun violence in the USA comes from blacks-who not only have low rates of LEGAL Gun ownership-but generally live in DEMOCRAT controlled cities with stupid gun control laws

Link?

why do graboids demand proof of stuff that has been posted on this forum thousands of times

GIYLF

GOOGLE IT YOURSELF LAZY FUCK

 

[M14 Shooter]

Seems as though you have your answer...

As do you, rendering your statement effectively meaningless.

Nope - Gun laws in the US state by state interactive US news theguardian.com

I thank you for your ineffective response.
Unless you describe how the limitations that all rights have are directly involved with my statement, you've only managed meaninglessly stated the obvious.
I'm sure this will only continue.

Works like this:

Right to a gun, but
Right to free speech, but
Right to privacy, but
Right to vote, but
Right to travel, but
Right to run for elected office, but

And so on. All rights have limitations, like those placed on guns and gun owners.

Don't try to use logic w/ a single-issue poster ESPECIALLY gun nutter single-issue, posters

You clearly aren't paying attention.

 

[M14 Shooter]

you really ought to quit pretending your goal is public safety, You hate gun owners because most of us don't vote for say idiots like Hillary clinton

Societies without guns are safer than societies with guns. The facts speak for themselves.

Never mind that you know you have no 'facts' to back this assertion up.

As for the politics of it, gun policy is pretty much the last thing I consider since gun nuts and their candidates usually don't make it onto the National Stage and are quickly laughed off of it.

^^^
Mindless partisan bigotry.

 

[Brain357]

The rate of gun violence among white Americans-the racial group that has the most gun ownership per capita IS LOWER Than the rate of gun violence of whites in most-if not all-of the Eurosocialist effete societies that ban or restrict handgun ownership. THE HIGHEST rate of gun violence in the USA comes from blacks-who not only have low rates of LEGAL Gun ownership-but generally live in DEMOCRAT controlled cities with stupid gun control laws

Link?

why do graboids demand proof of stuff that has been posted on this forum thousands of times

GIYLF

GOOGLE IT YOURSELF LAZY FUCK

As usual you can't back up your crazy claims.

 

[ClosedCaption]

More guns more guns more guns!!

Two men are dead in Ionia, Michigan after a road rage incident escalated into a shootout Wednesday. Police say that James Pullum, 43, and Robert Taylor, 56 apparently argued after Taylor became enraged over something that occurred while driving though the details are not clear as to exactly what precipitated the incident.

Both men had concealed carry permits and were legally carrying their weapons.

Two Proud Gun Nuts Second-Amendment Each Other To Death In Road Rage Incident Americans Against the Tea Party

I'm guessing here but...two white guys