gun facts for anti gunners...read at own risk...to your beliefs...

[Brain357]

One side of your mouth says 1000 guns going to criminals is bad. The other side says 232,000 is ok. Sure.

my answers are based on reality...not emotion...

 

[2aguy]

At what point did I say the guns going to criminals was okay...that is your emotions talking...it is just a fact of life...but another fact is that 300 million guns aren't stolen and 600,000 are used each year to stop crime and save,lives...go over to the 2guys and 2bats thread...another life saving story was told...you should check it out...

and having the chief law enforcement officer sell guns to drug gangs is objectively bad...considering his reason and his stance on gun ownership for law abiding citizens...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

predicated on the fact that American society perceives violence as a legitimate form of conflict resolution.

Actually, the more accurate point is that some humans perceive violence as not only the preferred way to resolve conflict but also as a way to empower themselves by brutalizing others...and if they are stronger, more numerous, and more aggressive, the old, the weak, smaller, females, the handicapped are all subject to their violence....unless....they have a means that compensate for their weakness,age, handicaps...and that is why guns are important...

You will never change the nature of violent human beings...but good people can stop them...if they have guns...

Nonsense.


The perception of violence as a legitimate form of conflict resolution is a learned behavior, children learn this from an early age, particularly when adults use violence against children, such as corporal punishment in school.


Consequently, as adults, in possession of firearms, when subject to conflict, many perceive the use of a gun (violence) as an appropriate means to resolve the conflict – when in fact it is not.


Otherwise, the notion of “the old, the weak, smaller, females, the handicapped” defending themselves from criminal attack is a red herring, having nothing to do with the problem of gun violence in America, as no one is seeking to 'disarm' Americans, or in any way prohibit Americans from possessing firearms pursuant to the right of self-defense.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

well, politifact did...their results didn't support their version of reality though...

besides...it is the anti 2nd amendment people who always throw Britain, Australia and Japan at the pro 2nd amendment people...they are wrong to do it but it helps them push their agenda...

This is another reason why your thread fails: there are no 'anti-Second Amendment people,' again: no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns, which is logistically and Constitutionally impossible; in every jurisdiction of the United States every person not prohibited from possessing firearms has the ability to secure a firearm for self-defense. Post Heller, nowhere in America are all firearms 'banned.'


And those who use the UK as an example of the positive result of gun control are just as wrong as you attempting to make the argument that gun control laws in the UK have failed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

where no one is advocating the gun laws of the UK be implemented in the United States.

both the sitting U.S. President and the possible future democrat President cited Australian gun laws and their desire to have their policies here...

Obama...

US president Barack Obama praises Australia s tough gun control laws - ABC News Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Incorrect.


The president said nothing about seeking to pass legislation similar to that of Australia.


It's perfectly appropriate to advocate for gun laws that reduce gun violence which comport with Second Amendment jurisprudence.


This is nothing more than subjective, errant inference on your part.


You're attempting to contrive an 'anti-gun' straw man, and your 'argument' fails as a fallacy accordingly.

 

[Brain357]

Ok so now you are saying that 232,000 guns stolen each year is a big problem?

Now the fictitious number is 600,000? Wow it keeps growing. Are they all still not reporting the criminals so they can just move onto the next crime?

At what point did I say the guns going to criminals was okay...that is your emotions talking...it is just a fact of life...but another fact is that 300 million guns aren't stolen and 600,000 are used each year to stop crime and save,lives...go over to the 2guys and 2bats thread...another life saving story was told...you should check it out...

and having the chief law enforcement officer sell guns to drug gangs is objectively bad...considering his reason and his stance on gun ownership for law abiding citizens...

 

[Peach]

My feelings about guns, which are very negative because events in my life, in no way impact the 2nd amendment.

I would like to see some dicussion about prescription pill abuse; in the last five years I have known at least 6 people who died from overdoses. Two were relatated to me by marriage. I live in gun heavy area, yet there are more deaths from pills than firearms now. One of my employees is disabled, is prescribed both Fentanyl patches and oxycontin. She has people in her very rural area of this county come to her home* and try to buy her medications. SHE IS NOT A DRUG DEALER!

*A mobile home by the way...............

 

[2aguy]

Actually, I went to the study that can be named from the Northwestern School of law paper on the defensive gun use research ...so, it is real research not fake...and again...I dare you to go to the police, say you brandished your weapon to thwart a violent crime...if you are lucky...they will be supporters of the right to keep and bear arms...if they are assholes...you are in for a world of temporary hurt...hope you have a lawyer on speed dial...you might need it...

 

[2aguy]

I would like to see some dicussion about prescription pill abuse; in the last five years I have known at least 6 people who died from overdoses.

That is a good topic for discussion...you should start a thread...be careful though...there are a lot of mean, ugly people out there...

 

[2aguy]

Here you go Brain357...

Armed Resistance to Crime The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun

The two also nicely complemented each other in that the Hart survey asked only about uses of handguns, while the Mauser survey asked about uses of all gun types. The Hart survey results implied a minimum of about 640,000 annual DGUs involving handguns, while the Mauser results implied about 700,000 involving any type of gun.[37]

There is a footnote...now you can track down the study by name...

And the conclusion of the Northwestern paper...

Since as many as 400,000 people a year use guns in situations where the defenders claim that they "almost certainly" saved a life by doing so, this result cannot be dismissed as trivial. If even one-tenth of these people are accurate in their stated perceptions, the number of lives saved by victim use of guns would still exceed the total number of lives taken with guns. It is not possible to know how many lives are actually saved this way, for the simple reason that no one can be certain how crime incidents would have turned out had the participants acted differently than they actually did. But surely this is too serious a matter to simply assume that practically everyone who says he believes he saved a life by using a gun was wrong.

 

[Brain357]

Please provide a link to support your claim that the police put somebody in a world of hurt for defending themselves.

Actually, I went to the study that can be named from the Northwestern School of law paper on the defensive gun use research ...so, it is real research not fake...and again...I dare you to go to the police, say you brandished your weapon to thwart a violent crime...if you are lucky...they will be supporters of the right to keep and bear arms...if they are assholes...you are in for a world of temporary hurt...hope you have a lawyer on speed dial...you might need it...

 

[2aguy]

Here is a case where a woman with a concealed carry permit carried it into the wrong state...and now faces 3 years in prison when she cooperated with police...

Honest mistake leads to Philly mother facing three years on gun charge Fox News

A Philadelphia mother of two is facing three years in prison after she mistakenly entered New Jersey, where she was stopped for a traffic violation and found in possession of a handgun loaded with hollow-point bullets.

Shaneen Allen, 27, was pulled over in New Jersey’s Atlantic County after making an unsafe lane change in the early morning hours of Oct. 1. Allen then told the officer that she had the .380 Bersa Thunder handgun, as well as a concealed carry permit for Pennsylvania, unaware that her permit was not transferable to The Garden State.

“The gun charge was not proper to begin with at all,” her attorney, Evan Nappen, told FoxNews.com. “She made an honest mistake.”

Allen, who has no criminal record, was later charged with unlawful possession of a weapon and possession of hollow-point bullets. If convicted, the illegal possession of the handgun is a second-degree felony punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of three years in prison.

"So in the effort of promoting gun control in New Jersey, they’ve created a situation where very sympathetic people get harmed and turned into the victim by gun laws."
- Attorney Evan Nappen

“New Jersey’s draconian and crazy gun laws gives the judge no discretion here — none,” Nappen continued. “You will get three years with no chance of parole if you’re convicted of this gun charge. So in the effort of promoting gun control in New Jersey, they’ve created a situation where very sympathetic people get harmed and turned into the victim by gun laws.”

She did the alleged right thing...she told the officer she had a legal permit...but it was from the wrong state...and they are sending this woman to jail...for 3 years...

 

[2aguy]

Hmmm...try this one...this shows why people are timid...about revealing their use of a gun to drive off an attacker...

If You Brandish a Gun in Self-Defense in Kansas You d Best Shoot It The Volokh ConspiracyThe Volokh Conspiracy

[A]fter leaving a bar in Emporia where [Brandon] Flint’s fiancee and another man exchanged angry words, Flint walked to his car. Outside, Flint’s fiancee and two men continued to talk in a heated fashion. Flint’s fiancee fell to the ground during the scuffle. At this point, Flint got his gun, walked back across the street, and pointed the gun at the chest of one of the men; both men immediately backed away. Flint’s fiancee got up, she and Flint walked back to Flint’s car, and they drove away.


The State charged Flint with aggravated assault, and the jury convicted him. Flint requested an instruction for defense of another under K.S.A. 21-3211(a), but the district court denied his request, ruling Flint’s use of force was greater than reasonably necessary to resist the attack….

Now at this point one might think there’d be a discussion of whether there was sufficient evidence that Flint reasonably thought that the fiancee was in danger of death, serious bodily injury, or the like, or merely was involved in a not very serious scuffle. Or one might think there’d be a discussion of whether at the point Flint pointed the gun, the fiancee was in continuing danger, or whether the men had already started to walk away. The discussion in the opinion suggests to me that there’d probably be enough of a factual question on the subject that the matter should be left to the jury, with a suitable defense-of-others instruction (unless no reasonable jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defense of others was justified, in which case Flint should have gotten a directed judgment of acquittal). But if the court had said that the facts revealed no reasonably perceptible threat of serious harm to the fiancee, I’d have been inclined to defer to the court’s knowledge of the record.

But that’s not what this case is about. Let’s keep reading:

A majority of the Supreme Court held in [State v. Hendrix, 289 Kan. 859 (2009),] that K.S.A. 21-3211 created a defense of self or defense of another only when there is “use of force.” The majority decided actual physical contact rather than a mere threat or display of force is necessary to raise this defense. Since Flint merely threatened the use of his gun and there was no actual force applied, he was not entitled to the defense of another.


Wow. Had Flint actually shot the gun, he would presumably have been entitled to have the jury consider his defense-of-others defense. (Such a defense would generally be roughly similar to a self-defense defense, and use of deadly force is generally allowed in self-defense against sufficiently serious threats.) But because Flint merely brandished the gun, he’s a felon — even if he reasonably believed that brandishing the gun was necessary to save his fiancee’s life. That is simply absurd.​

​

 

[Brain357]

So she is driving unsafely and illegally carrying a gun. When did she defend herself from crime?

Here is a case where a woman with a concealed carry permit carried it into the wrong state...and now faces 3 years in prison when she cooperated with police...

Honest mistake leads to Philly mother facing three years on gun charge Fox News

A Philadelphia mother of two is facing three years in prison after she mistakenly entered New Jersey, where she was stopped for a traffic violation and found in possession of a handgun loaded with hollow-point bullets.

Shaneen Allen, 27, was pulled over in New Jersey’s Atlantic County after making an unsafe lane change in the early morning hours of Oct. 1. Allen then told the officer that she had the .380 Bersa Thunder handgun, as well as a concealed carry permit for Pennsylvania, unaware that her permit was not transferable to The Garden State.

“The gun charge was not proper to begin with at all,” her attorney, Evan Nappen, told FoxNews.com. “She made an honest mistake.”

Allen, who has no criminal record, was later charged with unlawful possession of a weapon and possession of hollow-point bullets. If convicted, the illegal possession of the handgun is a second-degree felony punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of three years in prison.

"So in the effort of promoting gun control in New Jersey, they’ve created a situation where very sympathetic people get harmed and turned into the victim by gun laws."
- Attorney Evan Nappen

“New Jersey’s draconian and crazy gun laws gives the judge no discretion here — none,” Nappen continued. “You will get three years with no chance of parole if you’re convicted of this gun charge. So in the effort of promoting gun control in New Jersey, they’ve created a situation where very sympathetic people get harmed and turned into the victim by gun laws.”

She did the alleged right thing...she told the officer she had a legal permit...but it was from the wrong state...and they are sending this woman to jail...for 3 years...

 

[2aguy]

Yeah...an unsafe lane change...and she had a legal permit in her home state meaning she has a clean record...and she didn't brandish the weapon, or pull it or use it...just informed the officer on her own...trying to be a responsible citizen...and it may very well cost her 3 years of her life...

If she hadn't told the office about the gun...like a criminal would...she would be safe today...

That is why gun owners are leary about unnecessary interactions with police...you never know how they are going to go...

 

[2aguy]

Here is another case...now this article advises contacting the police regardless in order to prevent future arrest...

Legallyarmed.com The Internet Site For Legallyarmed Law Abiding Citizens

Here is an example of an actual incident that took place in Tennessee. The Handgun Pemit Holder in Tennessee rented trailers. One of the renters was behind on his rent. The Permit Holder went to the trailer of the renter. The renter was a large burley man who had a criminal history. He found out after he rented the trailer to him, that he had spent time in jail for murder. As the landloard approached the trailor, the rentor came running out of the house towards the landlord. Not knowing what was about to happen, the landloard drew his weapon but held it in his hand at his side, he did not point it at the renter. He yelled at the renter to stop running at him. When the rentor saw the pistol, he stopped running. The landlord told the renter he was behind on his rent. He needed him to pay the back rent in a few days, or he would have him evicted. The conflict did not escalate any further.

The following morning there was a knock on the door of the landloard. When he asked who was there, he was told it was a local Deputy Sheriff. When he opened the door, there were two Deputies with guns drawn. He held his hands up and told them he was un-armed. They put the landloard in handcuffs and told him that he was being arrested because of an incident the previous day, when he pulled a pistol on one of his renters. The landlord knew who had called them. He did not say anthing. He was taken to jail. He had the charges dismissed, but it cost him over $3,500.00 for an attorney. This is the same thing that can happen in any incident where a pistol is drawn, but no shots were fired.

If you have to draw your pistol but no shots were fired, and the incident ends without conflict, holster your pistol, and get out of the area before something else happens. Call the local Law Office, Police or Sheriff, and tell them exactly what happend. Let them know that your have a CCW Permit or License, and you were concerned about harm done to you. Thats why you drew your pistol in self-defense. You want to go on the record about what happened. Even if the person on the phone says not to worry about it, explain that you want to have the information recorded. The reason you want to do this is incase someone else comes in at a latter time, saying they want to press charges against you, or a witness tells them a different story then you told. Get a copy of your statement, and keep it for your records. Make sure it has the name of the employee who took it, the time, and date when it was taken.

 

[2aguy]

Another case...this guy didn't even pull his gun but someone called the police because he saw it on his person...

GUN WATCH VA Man charged with Brandishing for putting gun away

Like tens of thousands of other Virginians Corry carried a handgun legally for self defense. He intended to wear the gun at dinner which was with other gunowners who would be doing the same. He took the gun from his glovebox and placed it in the holster in his dash compartment. The reason for doing this was so he didn’t have to handle the gun in the parking lot, he merely had to strap it on.

The light turned green and he went to an enjoyable dinner and then home.
What he didn’t know was that Nathaniel Goodwyn, who was driving the bus behind him was angry that Corry hadn’t let him get into the turning Lane ahead of him.

Goodwyn had seen him move the gun and reported it to his security supervisor at Collegiate the next day, the security supervisor told an off-duty police officer who worked with the school.

At this point the story has gotten a lot like the teenage game of rumors. Each telling makes it worse. The officer obtained a warrant for brandishing a firearm.
Corry went to court on the 26th of this month. If the consequences hadn’t been so serious it would’ve been laughable. Goodwyn’s story changed several times while he was testifying for the prosecution. It reached the point to where he said Corry had glared at him and he could tell even though Corry was wearing sunglasses, a hat, and all he could see was the back of his head, that Corry had bad feelings because he focused on him.

I grew up in a legal family, married a judge’s daughter and have known dozens of judges both good and bad over the years. I have never however, seen a judge behave as badly as the one in this case. He simply did not want to hear any of the defense.

While Corry was testifying the judge was chatting with the clerk and filling out paperwork in other cases. He didn’t even bother to look at Corry.
Despite the absurdity of the charges and the testimony by Goodwyn, Corry was found guilty. To add to the judge’s misconduct, he sentenced Corry, who had no criminal record at all, to the maximum amount of jail time the law allows, then suspended half of it.

 

[Brain357]

Sounds like one side of the story...

Here is another case...now this article advises contacting the police regardless in order to prevent future arrest...

Legallyarmed.com The Internet Site For Legallyarmed Law Abiding Citizens

Here is an example of an actual incident that took place in Tennessee. The Handgun Pemit Holder in Tennessee rented trailers. One of the renters was behind on his rent. The Permit Holder went to the trailer of the renter. The renter was a large burley man who had a criminal history. He found out after he rented the trailer to him, that he had spent time in jail for murder. As the landloard approached the trailor, the rentor came running out of the house towards the landlord. Not knowing what was about to happen, the landloard drew his weapon but held it in his hand at his side, he did not point it at the renter. He yelled at the renter to stop running at him. When the rentor saw the pistol, he stopped running. The landlord told the renter he was behind on his rent. He needed him to pay the back rent in a few days, or he would have him evicted. The conflict did not escalate any further.

The following morning there was a knock on the door of the landloard. When he asked who was there, he was told it was a local Deputy Sheriff. When he opened the door, there were two Deputies with guns drawn. He held his hands up and told them he was un-armed. They put the landloard in handcuffs and told him that he was being arrested because of an incident the previous day, when he pulled a pistol on one of his renters. The landlord knew who had called them. He did not say anthing. He was taken to jail. He had the charges dismissed, but it cost him over $3,500.00 for an attorney. This is the same thing that can happen in any incident where a pistol is drawn, but no shots were fired.

If you have to draw your pistol but no shots were fired, and the incident ends without conflict, holster your pistol, and get out of the area before something else happens. Call the local Law Office, Police or Sheriff, and tell them exactly what happend. Let them know that your have a CCW Permit or License, and you were concerned about harm done to you. Thats why you drew your pistol in self-defense. You want to go on the record about what happened. Even if the person on the phone says not to worry about it, explain that you want to have the information recorded. The reason you want to do this is incase someone else comes in at a latter time, saying they want to press charges against you, or a witness tells them a different story then you told. Get a copy of your statement, and keep it for your records. Make sure it has the name of the employee who took it, the time, and date when it was taken.

 

[2aguy]

By the way Brain357...I found the papers that mention the gun studies...if you want to read them one cost 22 dollars, the other one was 44 dollars...if you want to dig deeper...you will have to pay...

they might be in Gary Klecks book too...if you are interested...you could get that at the library for free...

 

[2aguy]

Man defending himself against a beating by three men with a baseball bat is arrested...

Man Being Beaten With Baseball Bat Faces Charges For Shooting His Attackers Updated - Bearing Arms

The 39-year-old man accused of shooting the two Wednesday afternoon while he was being beaten with a baseball bat is being held in the Milwaukee County Jail on possible homicide charges.

The shootings were reported about 1 p.m. Wednesday at an apartment building in the 1400 block of N. 27th St.

Police said an argument occurred between the janitor and three people: the teens and a 20-year-old man.

The argument in the apartment stairwell led to a physical altercation, during which the maintenance worker was being held while one of the three beat him with the bat, officials said Wednesday.

The janitor then drew a gun and fired, shooting the two teens, police said.

He was hospitalized for injuries related to the bat-beating and has since been released.

The maintenance worker is now being held in jail on two possible counts of first-degree intentional homicide, according to jail records.

Reading these stories....it is easy to see why interacting with the police can be intimidating and not to be desired...