Why Gun Control is Bullshit

[Skull Pilot]

There is no question that there are controls over guns. The term "gun control" is such a broad issue that it has become a cliche. The dirty little secret of course is to substitute the word "confiscation" for "control" and that's the agenda of the low information often hypocritical left.

We have 32,000 gun deaths a year. Clearly, we don't have enough control over guns.

So .00009% of the population

And some of those are suicides and suicides don't count
Some of those are people killed by cops and that doesn't count

If you want to worry about what's killing people you need to start worrying about heart disease , cancer and obesity.

 

[JoeB131]

So .00009% of the population

And some of those are suicides and suicides don't count
Some of those are people killed by cops and that doesn't count

If you want to worry about what's killing people you need to start worrying about heart disease , cancer and obesity.

I do worry about those. We are spending billions helping people live healthier lifestyles, we are spending billions with stop smoking programs.

There isn't a "Obestiy Lobby" going out there trying to make sure that we lard down the food with extra fat.

 

[skookerasbil]

Its 2015.....nobody cares about gun control. Every poll is daunting to the gun grabber k00k.

Does Spambot need to post up the facts???


Anyway......gun manufacturers are giddy the past couple of years as sales go off the charts >>>

Record U.S. Gun Production as Obama Demonized on Issue - Bloomberg Business

 

[2aguy]

Joe...why do you still use suicide...well...you use it to increase your numbers because 8-9,000 gun deaths a year in a country of 320 million is tragic but not relevant.....but It doesn't matter that Japan has a culture of suicide.....your argument is that getting rid of guns lowers the suicide rate...and that is not true just from looking at Japan and South Korea....they have no guns. At all......

If your family member was one of the 11,000 people murdered with guns every year, it would be relevent. It would also be relevent if your found one of the suicide victims, if he killed himself a few feet where you are sitting.

Joe....on average the gun murder rate is around 8-9,000 a year and suicide is horrible regardless of the way they kill themseleves. How they did it would be less relevant than that they did it in the first place.....that is how messed up anti gunners are.......the first thing they would think about is...wow.....they used a gun.........

 

[skookerasbil]

[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/steamroller.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[skookerasbil]

Joe...why do you still use suicide...well...you use it to increase your numbers because 8-9,000 gun deaths a year in a country of 320 million is tragic but not relevant.....but It doesn't matter that Japan has a culture of suicide.....your argument is that getting rid of guns lowers the suicide rate...and that is not true just from looking at Japan and South Korea....they have no guns. At all......

If your family member was one of the 11,000 people murdered with guns every year, it would be relevent. It would also be relevent if your found one of the suicide victims, if he killed himself a few feet where you are sitting.

Joe....on average the gun murder rate is around 8-9,000 a year and suicide is horrible regardless of the way they kill themseleves. How they did it would be less relevant than that they did it in the first place.....that is how messed up anti gunners are.......the first thing they would think about is...wow.....they used a gun.........

Hey man.....you are trying to reason with somebody who has significant connect the dots issues ( a thinking disorder )

Anybody who thinks that the way to eliminate suicide is to ban guns is touched............that's why all I do is come in here and make fun of him. When you are dealing with a k00k, you deal with the absurd with even more pronounced absurd.

 

[2aguy]

Joe...why do you still use suicide...well...you use it to increase your numbers because 8-9,000 gun deaths a year in a country of 320 million is tragic but not relevant.....but It doesn't matter that Japan has a culture of suicide.....your argument is that getting rid of guns lowers the suicide rate...and that is not true just from looking at Japan and South Korea....they have no guns. At all......

If your family member was one of the 11,000 people murdered with guns every year, it would be relevent. It would also be relevent if your found one of the suicide victims, if he killed himself a few feet where you are sitting.

Joe...here is the FBI homicide table ....it is somewhat more accurate than the CDC for homicides.....

Gun murder rate for 2013...8,454.......out of 320 million people.........

 

[Skull Pilot]

So .00009% of the population

And some of those are suicides and suicides don't count
Some of those are people killed by cops and that doesn't count

If you want to worry about what's killing people you need to start worrying about heart disease , cancer and obesity.

I do worry about those. We are spending billions helping people live healthier lifestyles, we are spending billions with stop smoking programs.

There isn't a "Obestiy Lobby" going out there trying to make sure that we lard down the food with extra fat.

And it's not stopping those things from being the actual top killers of most Americans

So what on earth makes you think worrying about gun deaths that amount to a statistical anomaly of less than .00009% of the population that aren't criminals killed by cops or suicides will make a difference at all?

You're just afraid of law abiding people having guns why don't you admit it?

 

[skookerasbil]

Joe...why do you still use suicide...well...you use it to increase your numbers because 8-9,000 gun deaths a year in a country of 320 million is tragic but not relevant.....but It doesn't matter that Japan has a culture of suicide.....your argument is that getting rid of guns lowers the suicide rate...and that is not true just from looking at Japan and South Korea....they have no guns. At all......

If your family member was one of the 11,000 people murdered with guns every year, it would be relevent. It would also be relevent if your found one of the suicide victims, if he killed himself a few feet where you are sitting.

Joe...here is the FBI homicide table ....it is somewhat more accurate than the CDC for homicides.....

Gun murder rate for 2013...8,454.......out of 320 million people.........

The k00ks think that if you ban guns, the # will be zero!!!


A gun ban would drive gun murder rates into the stratosphere!!! The 2013 Harvard study makes that a slam dunk >> Harvard study concludes that gun control does not prevent murders other violent crime

 

[bgr39]

Joe...why do you still use suicide...well...you use it to increase your numbers because 8-9,000 gun deaths a year in a country of 320 million is tragic but not relevant.....but It doesn't matter that Japan has a culture of suicide.....your argument is that getting rid of guns lowers the suicide rate...and that is not true just from looking at Japan and South Korea....they have no guns. At all......

If your family member was one of the 11,000 people murdered with guns every year, it would be relevent. It would also be relevent if your found one of the suicide victims, if he killed himself a few feet where you are sitting.

Joe...here is the FBI homicide table ....it is somewhat more accurate than the CDC for homicides.....

Gun murder rate for 2013...8,454.......out of 320 million people.........

The k00ks think that if you ban guns, the # will be zero!!!


A gun ban would drive gun murder rates into the stratosphere!!! The 2013 Harvard study makes that a slam dunk >> Harvard study concludes that gun control does not prevent murders other violent crime

IF guns were banned, then only the criminals will have guns,
I'm still trying to figure out how they(liberals) are going to get the criminals to turn in their guns, IF there were a gun-ban.
It is the illegal guns that would have to be confiscated to make ANY difference IF there ever WAS a gun-ban.

 

[ralfy]

The implementation of "well-regulated militia" is seen in the Militia Acts, which forced males of a certain age range (and with few exceptions) to obtain the equivalent of battle rifles and ammunition and receive training annually with units controlled by the federal government.
That is clearly an example of gun control.
The Militia Act of 1903 called for regulation, etc., of the National Guard. These and others are part of the history of national service:
National service in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

This is an example of militia control, not gun control.

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and so any attempt to conflate service in the militia with the right to keep and bear arms in unsound.

It's gun control because the manner by which it is implemented, i.e., the Militia Acts, forced all males of a certain age range to obtain firearms and receive training with militia units regulated by the government.

No. Its regulation of the militia.
Related to, but separate from, gun control and not related to the right to keep and bear arms.

Not just regulated militia units but forcing male citizens to join them, as seen in the Militia Acts. These, together with a small standing army and multiple threats (the threat of invasion, slave revolts, attacks by Native Americans, and attacks by fellow citizens) led to the need of such regulation.

That's all well and good, but it doesn't speak to gun control outside the regulation of the militia - in other words, the regulation related to the militia applies only to people in the militia and is therefore not gun control across all those that the the right to arms; further, nothing in the regulation of the militia in reference to firearms may infringe on the right to arms held by those people in the militia.

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and so any attempt to conflate service in the militia with the right to keep and bear arms in unsound. Period.

.
.

It doesn't because the Second Amendment isn't about the right to bear arms. Rather, it uses the right to bear arms as justification for forming regulated militias.

To recap, the right to bear arms is a natural right and comes from English common law. That's why even before the Second was written colonists armed themselves and militias were already in place.

The basis of the right to bear arms is the right to defend oneself and loved ones. That does not require government approval, and it makes no sense to me that citizens need government approval to defend themselves.

The catch is that defending others, including strangers, is not a natural right. That's where the Second comes in. The problem was that the Continental army was small and the new country faced multiple threats: European invaders, whites rebelling, Native Americans attacking, and slave revolts. To solve this problem, the government took the natural right to bear arms and used it to justify what was essentially conscription. Thus, militias were either formed or existing ones were used (including those that were used as slave patrols) and regulated by government. That's why the context of the Second is Art. 1 Sec. 8 of the Constitution and the Militia Acts.

In essence, the Militia Acts were the implementation of the Second, where white males (and later, non-whites) of a certain age range (and with few exceptions) were forced to obtain the equivalent of battle rifles and train under militia units regulated by the government. They were to be used by the latter for various events involving the Whiskey Rebellion and others.

Thus, the Second is actually a form of gun control, in the sense that it was used in context of Art. 1 Sec. 8 and the Militia Acts to force citizens to arm themselves and serve the government.

As for the right to bear arms, it is a natural right and does not require approval from any government or through a Constitution.

Given that, what about gun control outside militias? That has nothing to do with the Second. Rather, gun control is an abridgment of natural rights, which is not a violation of the Constitution. What that means is that citizens have the natural right to defend themselves, but government may abridge that right through various restrictions, from registration to mandatory training to an outright ban. And the same may apply to other rights.

That's why convicts are not allowed to possess firearms. That's also why in some states capital punishment is allowed.

How to avoid gun control of one type or another? Make sure that the politicians who support one's beliefs wins.

 

[Jarlaxle]

you always say "common sense" yet you can not define what it means.

Sure i can.

Crazy people can't buy them.
Criminals can't buy them.
Weapons designed for warfare have no business in civilian hands.

if you call THAT "common sense".., i know for certain you have no brain, your IQ rating must be around -5.


.........

are you actually arguing that crazy people and criminals SHOULD be able to buy military grade weapons?

No, that's just your straw man.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe....on average the gun murder rate is around 8-9,000 a year and suicide is horrible regardless of the way they kill themseleves. How they did it would be less relevant than that they did it in the first place.....that is how messed up anti gunners are.......the first thing they would think about is...wow.....they used a gun.........

The average for the last 5 years is closer to 11K, although it dropped to 9000 recently.

The problem with gun suicides is that they are easy. No chance for a paramedic to save them or someone to talk them out of it or for them to think it through and realize it's a pretty bad idea.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

What a silly notion. You cannot control guns. They are an anarchical MOB. Not a hint of self respect of discipline. Often going off half cocked.

The concept of gun "control" is quite absurd.

You'd have more luck trying to impose law on gravity.

 

[2aguy]

Joe....on average the gun murder rate is around 8-9,000 a year and suicide is horrible regardless of the way they kill themseleves. How they did it would be less relevant than that they did it in the first place.....that is how messed up anti gunners are.......the first thing they would think about is...wow.....they used a gun.........

The average for the last 5 years is closer to 11K, although it dropped to 9000 recently.

The problem with gun suicides is that they are easy. No chance for a paramedic to save them or someone to talk them out of it or for them to think it through and realize it's a pretty bad idea.

Then don't focus on the gun...focus on telling people to get help, and tell people that no matter how bad things are they can get help......people who want to die, will...those other countries prove it....work on the people, not the method...

 

[2aguy]

Joe....on average the gun murder rate is around 8-9,000 a year and suicide is horrible regardless of the way they kill themseleves. How they did it would be less relevant than that they did it in the first place.....that is how messed up anti gunners are.......the first thing they would think about is...wow.....they used a gun.........

The average for the last 5 years is closer to 11K, although it dropped to 9000 recently.

The problem with gun suicides is that they are easy. No chance for a paramedic to save them or someone to talk them out of it or for them to think it through and realize it's a pretty bad idea.

Actually Joe, if you look at the FBI table on homicide, table 8.....the highest year from 2009-2013 was 2009 at 9,199 gun murders and it went down each year from there to the low of 8,454 in 2013.

The CDC is the less accurate number, I saw the explanation for that somewhere, so the FBI stats are generally closer to the more accurate number.....

FBI Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

 

[JoeB131]

Then don't focus on the gun...focus on telling people to get help, and tell people that no matter how bad things are they can get help......people who want to die, will...those other countries prove it....work on the people, not the method...

Why not work on both? frankly, most problems have m ultiple causes and require multiple solutions.

You see, my big problem with you gun fetishists is that you really don't care how much carnage your fetish causes. You claim gun ownership is a "right", when it should be a privilege only accorded to those who are responsible. Which is how most of the rest of the world treats it.

 

[2aguy]

joe....I tried being polite...I called you by your name......now it is back to asshole....

How can you say we don't care....we are the ones promoting gun safety....we care about people being preyed on by criminals. It is you assholes...who know that criminals with or without guns will attack innocent people....yet you want the innocent people unarmed, and victims......guns stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives 1.6 million times a year.....and yet you don't want those people saved.....you want them raped, robb d, beaten and murdered... All because you have the phobia Bout guns.......

You guys don't care about people....you don't like people...you probably hate them....deep down inside...so their suffering doesn't matter...you bitch and moan and talk about gun violence....but it is only about the gun...not the people....they could pile bodies up and up....and you don't care....if all guns disappeared from the planet you wouldn't care less when the people were rAped and murdered....because the guns would be gone...

You guys come up with laws that don't stop gun crime, but only attack regular people owning guns....and then you expect us to take you seriously...

Screw you...moron

 

[Missourian]

There is no question that there are controls over guns. The term "gun control" is such a broad issue that it has become a cliche. The dirty little secret of course is to substitute the word "confiscation" for "control" and that's the agenda of the low information often hypocritical left.

We have 32,000 gun deaths a year. Clearly, we don't have enough control over guns.

How many of those are suicides?

How many are justified?

Last estimate I heard was 8,000 criminal homicides.

Sure, that sounds like a lot...but there are 330 million citizens in this country, and there are 270 million guns.

Sounds like the vast majority of gun owners are controlling themselves.

 

[AntiParty]

[ame=[MEDIA=youtube]yTJVARoj7gc[/MEDIA] Gun Control is Bullshit - YouTube[/ame]





That's not their goal to begin with. Tyranny, oppression and control are their goals.

Two Posts Merged, to bring OP into compliance. Opening Posts require relevant personal Input by the Poster, not just a copy and paste or a link.

The instant the NRA was failing to make money they started signing deals with Military Weapons Manufacturers. I'm not judging, it simply happened.

It's up to THE PEOPLE what weapons we should be allowed to hold.