Fbi Report Ends Nra Nonsense About "good Guys With Guns"

[JoeB131]

[

Pressure cookers and cars aren't designed to kill people.

Guns are. Therefore, who owns them deserves greater scrutiny.

There ALREADY is greater scrutiny when buying a gun than a pressure cooker, genius!!!

Holmes, Lanza, Loughner, Cho, were all able to get guns.

32,000 gun deaths.

3 Pressure cooker deaths. One Time.

Greater scrutiny doesn't mean ENOUGH Scrutiny.

 

[ChrisL]

[

Pressure cookers and cars aren't designed to kill people.

Guns are. Therefore, who owns them deserves greater scrutiny.

There ALREADY is greater scrutiny when buying a gun than a pressure cooker, genius!!!

Holmes, Lanza, Loughner, Cho, were all able to get guns.

32,000 gun deaths.

3 Pressure cooker deaths. One Time.

Greater scrutiny doesn't mean ENOUGH Scrutiny.

First off, if someone has NO criminal record, then how would YOU suggest they "scrutinize" people? What information is it that you are looking for before you "allow" a person to practice his/her constitutional rights?

Perhaps you are advocating for MORE government interference to actually invade our privacy as well?

 

[JoeB131]

[

First off, if someone has NO criminal record, then how would YOU suggest they "scrutinize" people? What information is it that you are looking for before you "allow" a person to practice his/her constitutional rights?

Perhaps you are advocating for MORE government interference to actually invade our privacy as well?

The Second Amdendment is about Militias. Now, I was a member of one of them thar "Well-Regulated Militias", and before they let me have a gun, they fingerprinted me, put me through weeks and weeks of training and then only let me fire the gun under controlled circumstances until they were sure I knew what i as doing.

But going back to my point. Everyone in the life of Cho/Loughner/Lanza knew he was nuts, and we find this out usually before they've bagged up all the bodies. I don't think the Founding Slave Rapists had them in mind.

 

[ChrisL]

[

First off, if someone has NO criminal record, then how would YOU suggest they "scrutinize" people? What information is it that you are looking for before you "allow" a person to practice his/her constitutional rights?

Perhaps you are advocating for MORE government interference to actually invade our privacy as well?

The Second Amdendment is about Militias. Now, I was a member of one of them thar "Well-Regulated Militias", and before they let me have a gun, they fingerprinted me, put me through weeks and weeks of training and then only let me fire the gun under controlled circumstances until they were sure I knew what i as doing.

But going back to my point. Everyone in the life of Cho/Loughner/Lanza knew he was nuts, and we find this out usually before they've bagged up all the bodies. I don't think the Founding Slave Rapists had them in mind.

No it isn't. Obviously the second amendment is about having an armed populace, ready to fight at a moment's notice. Like we did with the Brits during the Revolutionary War. THAT was the purpose behind the second amendment. Just because YOU and people with your silly ideological beliefs would try and redefine the second amendment only means you are a dishonest POS and a traitor to the American people. United States citizens should DESPISE people such as yourself. You are a like a pimple on the butt of our freedom.

Your "he says/she says" scenarios are also stupid beyond belief. "Everyone" knew he was nuts. Well, THAT is not the fault of other responsible gun owners, you traitor.

What you personally believe about the founders of our country (which you are LUCKY to live in, you ingrate), is irrelevant to anything.

 

[jon_berzerk]

[

First off, if someone has NO criminal record, then how would YOU suggest they "scrutinize" people? What information is it that you are looking for before you "allow" a person to practice his/her constitutional rights?

Perhaps you are advocating for MORE government interference to actually invade our privacy as well?

The Second Amdendment is about Militias. Now, I was a member of one of them thar "Well-Regulated Militias", and before they let me have a gun, they fingerprinted me, put me through weeks and weeks of training and then only let me fire the gun under controlled circumstances until they were sure I knew what i as doing.

But going back to my point. Everyone in the life of Cho/Loughner/Lanza knew he was nuts, and we find this out usually before they've bagged up all the bodies. I don't think the Founding Slave Rapists had them in mind.

simply more BS

 

[ChrisL]

Joe is scared and wants the government to protect his fat pansy arse. Get up off your lazy arse and protect yourself and your family like a MAN, Joe. The government doesn't care if you live or die, as long as you pay your taxes fool!

 

[jon_berzerk]

Joe is scared and wants the government to protect his fat pansy arse. Get up off your lazy arse and protect yourself and your family like a MAN, Joe. The government doesn't care if you live or die, as long as you pay your taxes fool!

what is odd the same folks who wish for the bigger government and its safety

complain about the bigger government police practices

 

[ChrisL]

Joe is scared and wants the government to protect his fat pansy arse. Get up off your lazy arse and protect yourself and your family like a MAN, Joe. The government doesn't care if you live or die, as long as you pay your taxes fool!

what is odd the same folks who wish for the bigger government and its safety

complain about the bigger government police practices

The same people who will tell you that the police are all a bunch of racists!! They are SO dumb and ignorant, they are constantly contradicting themselves.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Joe is scared and wants the government to protect his fat pansy arse. Get up off your lazy arse and protect yourself and your family like a MAN, Joe. The government doesn't care if you live or die, as long as you pay your taxes fool!

what is odd the same folks who wish for the bigger government and its safety

complain about the bigger government police practices

The same people who will tell you that the police are all a bunch of racists!! They are SO dumb and ignorant, they are constantly contradicting themselves.

that is what they do

 

[turtledude]

I remember a few years back in my area, a guy ran through a daycare center's playground with his vehicle and took out a few kids, at least one died if not more. A bunch were injured, some seriously. The bottom line is there are going to be lunatics, and once these lunatics get it into their mind that they want to kill people, they will find a way.

We also had the Boston Marathon bombing. Should we ban pressure cookers? It isn't a right. You can get along without one, and someone COULD make it into a bomb and kill and maim a whole bunch of people.

if only conservatives or mainly conservatives owned pressure cookers, the anti gun turds would want to ban them too

That's probably the case with some people, and other people display an irrational fear of an inanimate object. I don't think it's right that they would ask honest people who obey the law to give up their right because of the actions of crazy people. It's ridiculous IMO.

Pressure cookers and cars aren't designed to kill people.

Guns are. Therefore, who owns them deserves greater scrutiny.

no moron, guns are designed to project a bullet.
and people are no less dead if they are run over with a car or blown up with an IED

 

[turtledude]

[


good smack, you napalmed that moron

All I saw her do is her typical batshit crazy name-calling. She brought no statistics to the argument.

STFU you hysterical lying fairy. You want to ban all guns. You have proven you are incapable of intelligent conversation on this subject

 

[JoeB131]

[Q

No it isn't. Obviously the second amendment is about having an armed populace, ready to fight at a moment's notice. Like we did with the Brits during the Revolutionary War. THAT was the purpose behind the second amendment. Just because YOU and people with your silly ideological beliefs would try and redefine the second amendment only means you are a dishonest POS and a traitor to the American people. United States citizens should DESPISE people such as yourself. You are a like a pimple on the butt of our freedom.

Actually, for most our 200 years, the Second Amendement was NEVER recognized as a right to own guns. In fact, quite the opposite.

On June 8, 1789, James Madison—an ardent Federalist who had won election to Congress only after agreeing to push for changes to the newly ratified Constitution—proposed 17 amendments on topics ranging from the size of congressional districts to legislative pay to the right to religious freedom. One addressed the “well regulated militia” and the right “to keep and bear arms.” We don’t really know what he meant by it. At the time, Americans expected to be able to own guns, a legacy of English common law and rights. But the overwhelming use of the phrase “bear arms” in those days referred to military activities.

Though state militias eventually dissolved, for two centuries we had guns (plenty!) and we had gun laws in towns and states, governing everything from where gunpowder could be stored to who could carry a weapon—and courts overwhelmingly upheld these restrictions. Gun rights and gun control were seen as going hand in hand. Four times between 1876 and 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule that the Second Amendment protected individual gun ownership outside the context of a militia. As the Tennessee Supreme Court put it in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”

Read more: How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - Michael Waldman - POLITICO Magazine

[Q
Your "he says/she says" scenarios are also stupid beyond belief. "Everyone" knew he was nuts. Well, THAT is not the fault of other responsible gun owners, you traitor.

It is when a gun shop sells that person a gun.

[Q
What you personally believe about the founders of our country (which you are LUCKY to live in, you ingrate), is irrelevant to anything.

Uh, no, the Founding Slave rapists were a bunch of rich guys who didn't want to pay their taxes. Kind of the Founding retardation. Oh my God, they saved us from being Canadians!!!!! I just can't get that worked up about it.

If they had lost, we'd have ended slavery without a civil war. Can't see that as a bad thing.

 

[JoeB131]

[


good smack, you napalmed that moron

All I saw her do is her typical batshit crazy name-calling. She brought no statistics to the argument.

STFU you hysterical lying fairy. You want to ban all guns. You have proven you are incapable of intelligent conversation on this subject

Again, all you guys are bringing is name-calling. The best argument for gun control is to let gun nuts talk.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe is scared and wants the government to protect his fat pansy arse. Get up off your lazy arse and protect yourself and your family like a MAN, Joe. The government doesn't care if you live or die, as long as you pay your taxes fool!

No, I just think people like you are more dangerous to me than the most tyrannical government. Listening to you guys and your snuff fantasies is kind of frightening.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'Fbi Report Ends Nra Nonsense About "good Guys With Guns"'

Unfortunately the report doesn't end the ignorant nonsense that incidents of self-defense with a concealed firearm 'justify' the right to carry a concealed firearm.


Second Amendment jurisprudence alone is the only justification needed.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The truth is that the "Right to bear arms" was actually the government trying to save money. When the Bill of Rights was written, there was no standing army in the USA. If a crisis arose, a militia was called up, and everyone was expected to bring their own gun. This is why the 2nd mentioned the word, "militia" in the first place. The government had no intention at the time of either having a standing army or of furnishing their weapons. When Washington put down the Shay rebellion, he did so with a militia, who brought their own guns.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

[


good smack, you napalmed that moron

All I saw her do is her typical batshit crazy name-calling. She brought no statistics to the argument.

STFU you hysterical lying fairy. You want to ban all guns. You have proven you are incapable of intelligent conversation on this subject

Again, all you guys are bringing is name-calling. The best argument for gun control is to let gun nuts talk.

True.


The ignorance and stupidity expressed by extremists do more to jeopardize the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment than any 'gun grabber' might so.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I am a sheriff's auxiliary volunteer. I can tell you that, on the streets, cops aer more afraid of citizens carrying a gun, than bad guys carrying a gun, because deputies are scared of shooting a citizen who is shooting a gun while chasing a bad guy who just held him up. As a result, what would otherwise be a slam dunk (shooting somebody to death who is firing a weapon at somebody) is, instead, a life or death decision, which can easily cause a hesitation that could get the wrong guy killed.

you are a lying POS. I was a DOJ official for 24 years and very few agents would agree with your crap.

Why this thread is still going after this response is beyond me. Vandal had his backside handed to him.

 

[eflatminor]

Here's how these incidents ended.

More than half (56 percent) were terminated by the shooter who either took his or her own life, simply stopped shooting or fled the scene. Which every 2nd amendment advocate acknowledges. That is, bad guys with guns are stopped by good guys with guns or they kill themselves. Nobody ever denied the frequency with which these pieces of shit off themselves. Rather disingenuous of you to suggest it.

Another 26 percent ended in the traditional Hollywood-like fashion with the shooter and law enforcement personnel exchanging gunfire and in nearly all of those situations the shooter ended up either wounded or dead. Law enforcement...good guys with guns stopping bad guys. Thanks for making out point.

In 13 percent of the shooting situations, the shooter was successfully disarmed and restrained by unarmed civilians, Which could have been accomplished so much more efficiently where those unarmed civilians armed. Why do you wish good guys to be at a disadvantage? Incredible!

and in 3 percent of the incidents the shooter was confronted by armed civilians, of whom four were on-duty security guards and one person was just your average "good guy" who happened to be carrying a gun." So, including suicides, where I would argue the bad guy FINALLY became a good guy by shooting himself, it would appear bad guys with guns are stopped by armed good guys 87% of the time, while the remaining 13% WISH they were armed.

And we'll just overlook that fact that the VAST majority of shootings are not "active shooting incidents" but run of the mill armed robberies and murders. Way to cherry pick and even then, fail to make your point. Ha!

Fail there pal, MASSIVE fail.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The truth is that the "Right to bear arms" was actually the government trying to save money. When the Bill of Rights was written, there was no standing army in the USA. If a crisis arose, a militia was called up, and everyone was expected to bring their own gun. This is why the 2nd mentioned the word, "militia" in the first place. The government had no intention at the time of either having a standing army or of furnishing their weapons. When Washington put down the Shay rebellion, he did so with a militia, who brought their own guns.

The truth is, Vandal, that you are fighting a losing battle. Unless you were there over 230 years ago when the Bill of Rights was first drafted, you can't say you know what the founders intent was. The Bill of Rights was crafted with guidance from Sir William Blackstone's commentaries on English Law. I know, I have a copy of his commentaries. In it, he says a person has a right to defend themselves in the event someone tries to take their life if the presiding law fails to protect them; he defines it as a public allowance, not purely restricted to one group or another:

Document 4

William Blackstone, Commentaries 1:139

1765

5. The fifth and last auxiliary right of the subject, that I shall at present mention, is that of having arms for their defence, suitable to their condition and degree, and such as are allowed by law. Which is also declared by the same statute I W. & M. st. 2. c. 2. and is indeed a public allowance, under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.

Now, it is my belief that the founders had this bit of commentary in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. Don't let the fact he was a failed attorney and judge fool you, his commentaries were what helped the founders draft the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence. and the first primal laws to sprout from the constitution.