Why are so many afraid of guns?

Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.

According to you.

yes, the heller decision was a huge screw you. but the dissent is actually much more well-reasoned than the decision.

is what it is though.
 
Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

:woohoo: love that tough talk.

guns are what they are. but i sure as heck want to know who's owning them and that criminals and crazy people aren't allowed to get them.

It is actually that simple, no need to complicate the issue, there are laws in place to keep guns out of the hands of the crazies. That is important, and I am glad they are in place.

But I will also say that many people do not want the government to even know that they own a gun, is that a violation of privacy, to Americans that want to protect themselves?

The police is not actually there to protect,per se they are basically there to solve any crime that has been already been perpetrated against you.

I see gun ownership as a right for me to protect myself and my family.

the position of the NRA is that there should be no controls. and i don't have a particular issue with lawful gun ownership. i do have a problem with yahoos who define themselves by their guns and make it a focal point of their self-identification.

registering ones guns is not a violation of the right to privacy. it's not even a 4th amendment issue. nor have i ever seen it asserted as one. the loons try to rely on the 2nd amendment for that proposition best as i can tell.

as for what the police are and aren't there for, it's a mixed bag. their presence certainly acts as a deterrant.
 
Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.

Again your Indoctrination is evident. You could not be wrong in error. You still are far from purchasing enough Judges to pervert further your misrepresentation of the Second Amendment.






Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear,the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

The argument under the present head may be put into a very concise form, which appears altogether conclusive. Either the mode in which the federal government is to be constructed will render it sufficiently dependent on the people, or it will not. On the first supposition, it will be restrained by that dependence from forming schemes obnoxious to their constituents. On the other supposition, it will not possess the confidence of the people, and its schemes of usurpation will be easily defeated by the State governments, who will be supported by the people. -James Madison

Federalist Papers: FEDERALIST No. 46
 
:woohoo: love that tough talk.

guns are what they are. but i sure as heck want to know who's owning them and that criminals and crazy people aren't allowed to get them.

It is actually that simple, no need to complicate the issue, there are laws in place to keep guns out of the hands of the crazies. That is important, and I am glad they are in place.

But I will also say that many people do not want the government to even know that they own a gun, is that a violation of privacy, to Americans that want to protect themselves?

The police is not actually there to protect,per se they are basically there to solve any crime that has been already been perpetrated against you.

I see gun ownership as a right for me to protect myself and my family.

the position of the NRA is that there should be no controls. and i don't have a particular issue with lawful gun ownership. i do have a problem with yahoos who define themselves by their guns and make it a focal point of their self-identification.

registering ones guns is not a violation of the right to privacy. it's not even a 4th amendment issue. nor have i ever seen it asserted as one. the loons try to rely on the 2nd amendment for that proposition best as i can tell.

as for what the police are and aren't there for, it's a mixed bag. their presence certainly acts as a deterrant.

The NRA does Support Reasonable Legislation.
 
Things got much better since the tough guns laws.


Debated this last year.

I've never compared accidents, but I did compare homicides by state.

[FONT=arial,arial]These are the 13 states with the most pro-Second Amendment laws according to the Brady Center (Oklahoma being the most pro-Second Amendment in the nation) with total firearm murders from 2007 according to the FBI and population from the Census Bureau:[/FONT]​



----------State-----------------------------# of Firearm Homicides-----------Population





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

  • Arkansas ----------------------130 ------------2,810,872
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Idaho -------------------------------------------------25 ---------------------1,466,465[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]New Mexico ---------------------------------------81 ---------------------1,954,599[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]South Dakota ---------------------------------------4 -----------------------781,919[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]West Virginia --------------------------------------37 --------------------1,818,470[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Mississippi ---------------------------------------119 ---------------------2,910,540[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Alaska -----------------------------------------------21 --------------------- 670,053[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Louisiana ------------------------------------------455----------------------4,287,768[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Missouri -------------------------------------------247 ---------------------5,842,713[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]North Dakota ----------------------------------------3 -----------------------635,867[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Utah ---------------------------------------------------38 --------------------2,550,063[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Kentucky ------------------------------------------131 --------------------4,206,074[/FONT]
  • [FONT=arial,arial]Oklahoma -------------------------------- --------132 --------------------3,579,212[/FONT]
And the 13 strictest gun control states according to the Brady Center (California being the strictest in the nation) with total firearm murders from 2007 according to the FBI and population from the Census Bureau:


  • California -----------------------1,605-----36,457,549
  • New Jersey ----------------------260-------8,724,560
  • Connecticut ----------------------57 -------3,504,809
  • Massachusetts ------------------114 -------6,437,193
  • Maryland ------------------------414------- 5,615,727
  • New York ------------------------500 -----19,306,183
  • Rhode Island -------------------- --9 ------ 1,067,610
  • Hawaii -----------------------------3 -------1,285,498
  • Illinois ---------------------------343* -----12,831,970
  • Pennsylvania ---------------------527 ------12,440,621
  • Michigan -------------------------444 ------10,095,643
  • Delaware--------------------------22 ---------853,476
  • North Carolina--------------------369 --------8,856,505
* incomplete data received by the FBI


The District of Columbia is not listed on the Brady Center ranking list but it did have the strictest gun control in the nation in 2007:

  • District of Columbia-----------------181--------581,530
So here is the break down for firearm homicides per number of citizens per state plus the District of Columbia with Washington D.C. being the most dangerous place to live with 1 out of every 3,212 residents murdered by firearms and Hawaii being the safest with 1 out of every 428,499 residents murdered by firearms.


The number listed is the population divided by the total firearm homicides to render 1 homicide per (X) number of residents. (Red are Strict Gun Control, Blue are Pro-gun)


  1. District of Columbia -----------1 / 3,212
  2. Louisiana ---------------------1 / 9,423
  3. Maryland ---------------------1 / 13,564
  4. Arkansas ---------------------1 / 21,622
  5. California ---------------------1 / 22,714
  6. Michigan ---------------------1 / 22,737
  7. Pennsylvania -----------------1 / 23,606
  8. Missouri ----------------------1 / 23,654
  9. North Carolina ----------------1 / 24,001
  10. New Mexico ------------------1 / 24,130
  11. Mississippi --------------------1 / 24,458
  12. Oklahoma --------------------1 / 25,115
  13. Alaska -----------------------1 / 31,907
  14. Kentucky ---------------------1 / 32,107
  15. New Jersey -------------------1 / 33,556
  16. Illinois ------------------------1 / 37,410
  17. New York ---------------------1 / 38,612
  18. Delaware ---------------------1 / 38,794
  19. West Virgina ------------------1 / 49,147
  20. Massachusetts ----------------1 / 56,466
  21. Idaho -------------------------1 / 58,658
  22. Connecticut -------------------1 / 61,487
  23. Utah --------------------------1 / 67,106
  24. Rhode Island -------------------1 / 118,623
  25. South Dakota ------------------1 / 195,479
  26. North Dakota -------------------1 / 211,955
  27. Hawaii -------------------------1 / 428,499
Bottom line, stricter firearm laws have no effect on firearm homicides.


That is why the Brady Center uses violent crime or firearm deaths instead of actual firearm homicides even though the firearm homicides are provided by the FBI online every year.






Link to FBI Stats Table 20 - Crime in the United States 2007

Link to Brady Center state rankings list http://www.stategunlaws.org/xshare/p...d_rankings.pdf

Population from the U.S. Census Bureau State and County QuickFacts

Wikipedia Firearm Homicides for the District of Columbia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Washington,_D.C.



http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...s-our-2nd-amendment-right-10.html#post1794625
 
All anyone needs to do is look at Switzerland for an idea of how gun rights and low crime rates correlate.
 
All anyone needs to do is look at Switzerland for an idea of how gun rights and low crime rates correlate.

Mandatory Military service will do that..

Military of Switzerland
The Swiss Armed Forces perform the roles of Switzerland's militia and regular army. Under the country's militia system, professional soldiers constitute about 5 percent of military personnel; the rest are conscript citizens 18 to 34 (in some cases up to 50) years old. Because of a long history of neutrality, the army does not take part in armed conflicts in other countries, but is part of several peacekeeping missions around the world.
Military of Switzerland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is by the way..closer to the original intent of our own Constitution..then the perversion we now live under.
 
Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.

According to you.

No.

According to the United States Constitution. Arguments to the contrary generally don't hold water unless you parse the amendment, go to some of the "OpEds" in the Federalist Papers (Some which contradict each other) or just completely dismiss the actual text of the Constitution altogether. Or history for that matter.
 
Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.

Again your Indoctrination is evident. You could not be wrong in error. You still are far from purchasing enough Judges to pervert further your misrepresentation of the Second Amendment.

it isn't "indoctrination" to agree with half the court.

it IS indoctrination to call that indoctrination. just sayin', hon.
 
It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.

According to you.

No.

According to the United States Constitution. Arguments to the contrary generally don't hold water unless you parse the amendment, go to some of the "OpEds" in the Federalist Papers (Some which contradict each other) or just completely dismiss the actual text of the Constitution altogether. Or history for that matter.

yes, but unfortunately, scalia and his boys held differently.
 
anyone who doesnt fear a gun is an idiot.

Guns can kill in a split second.

Do you fear this?
stock-photo-glass-of-whiskey-scotch-or-bourbon-on-the-rocks-placed-on-top-of-a-wooden-bar-with-black-48465934.jpg


because there is a much greater chance that it will kill you than there is any gun.

Well I have been mugged at gun point, had my home invaded by guys with guns, got shot at a few times, and have been to funerals of several friends I lost to gun violence.

None of the guys were holding drinks.




What's your gangbanger name?
 
Well I have been mugged at gun point, had my home invaded by guys with guns, got shot at a few times, and have been to funerals of several friends I lost to gun violence.

None of the guys were holding drinks.

Your personal experience doesn't change the reality that you are 4 times more likely to be killed by alcohol than by a firearm.

Sounds to me like you REALLY need to move to a better neighborhood?

Things got much better since the tough guns laws.




Oh sure they did. Whenever guns are outlawed the crime in teh neighborhood allways goes up. Let's look at the anti gunners paradise Australia. After most guns of any kind were outlawed violent crime shot up 44% and rape shot up 300%. Sure those gun laws work.:cuckoo:
 
Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.




Boy are you ever wrong. Why would the State need a guarantee of it's right to have weapons?
 
C'mon Mini. You refer to murkins.
They are all afraid of simple things.
A problem with a hard drive is enough to call the shrink and munch some Prozac.
 
Well I have been mugged at gun point, had my home invaded by guys with guns, got shot at a few times, and have been to funerals of several friends I lost to gun violence.

None of the guys were holding drinks.




What's your gangbanger name?

Fuck you.

Asshole.

That's a funny yet appropriate name. ;) FUA.... FUAH? Which do you prefer? ;) We have got to get you out of the City. Get you into some fresh air. Get you a new outlook and new Nick Name.
 
Many anti gun activists seem to think that gun ownership is a disease, to be eradicated. :cuckoo:

It is a Constitutional right, and no amount of projection will eradicate that right.

"From our cold dead hands" :cool:

It's a collective constitutional right..not an indivdual one. It's been perverted beyond original intent.




Boy are you ever wrong. Why would the State need a guarantee of it's right to have weapons?

You really want to go here?

Decentralized military.
 

Forum List

Back
Top