What I don't understand about gun Nazis

[KGB]

How about you go have a chat with Sen. Dianne Reinstein
and get back to us on that, no one wants rip up the 2nd and roundup all the guns thing.

Feinstein had two of her friends shot right in front of her, I can see why she has a strong opinion on the subject.

Here's the thing. You guys never tell us what your alternative plan is to keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous lunatics. You simply state this is the cost of freedom to have to worry at any moment, a disgruntled coworker or angry student might go on an "active shooter' incident.

We have been saying but libs won't listen. Rigoursly enforce the existing laws instead of finding new ways to release dangerous criminals early. Get rid of gun free zones which attract these lunatics in the first place. Follow the Constitution with national reciprocity. Quit demonizing cops who are simply trying to do their jobs & return to their homes & families. It's not that hard...

 

[KGB]

Nope......we arrest violent criminals caught carrying guns and lock them up a long time...also we support the various inner city groups trying to help young males trapped in these gang infested neighborhoods who end up doing the killing.....

We lock up 2 million people. Most industrial democracies only lock up a few thousand.

if guns and prisons were a solution, we'd have the lowest crime rate in the industrialied world.

Need to go back to your "Excuse box", that one won't fly.

And we clearly release these animals too early...

 

[hazlnut]

1. Why is it that we should not hold all Muslims to blame for a few lunatic few terrorists by forcibly screeing them in any way, but we should hold all gun owners suspect of being guilty until proven innocent with various screening processes because of a few lunatic domestic terrorists?

2, Why is it that we should trust the police and the military with guns more than the average citizen?

3. When you finally get a lib stooge on the Supreme Court to rip up the 2nd Amendment, only needing one more after Scalia died, how will you round up all the guns?

As Patrick Henry once wrote, "Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"

The entire Canadian active-duty army has fewer people carrying arms than the US federal government civilian agencies!

Shit, what you don't understand could fill an entire football stadium.

No one is "ripping" up the second -- you people are fucking freaks of nature.

 

[JoeB131]

We have been saying but libs won't listen. Rigoursly enforce the existing laws instead of finding new ways to release dangerous criminals early. Get rid of gun free zones which attract these lunatics in the first place. Follow the Constitution with national reciprocity. Quit demonizing cops who are simply trying to do their jobs & return to their homes & families. It's not that hard...

Guy, we lock up TWO MILLION PEOPLE. Locking them up doesn't solve much of anything.

Gun free zones keeps arguments over who ate someone's lunch from turning deadly. We need gun free zones because too many assholes are out there with guns.

No, the constitution says "Well-regulated", and for most our history, that means states set their own regulations.

Cops who shoot unarmed children aren't doing their jobs. They are doing the exact oppossite of their jobs. If they are so keen to return home to their families, they need to find something else to do for a living.

 

[JoeB131]

And we clearly release these animals too early...

Most gun deaths are suicides and domestic arguments, so no.

 

[2aguy]

Nope......we arrest violent criminals caught carrying guns and lock them up a long time...also we support the various inner city groups trying to help young males trapped in these gang infested neighborhoods who end up doing the killing.....

We lock up 2 million people. Most industrial democracies only lock up a few thousand.

if guns and prisons were a solution, we'd have the lowest crime rate in the industrialied world.

Need to go back to your "Excuse box", that one won't fly.

Wrong....the people shooting other people are a tiny number...lock them up....get teenagers to stop having kids...and the problem will correct itself.

 

[2aguy]

And we clearly release these animals too early...

Most gun deaths are suicides and domestic arguments, so no.

Most domestic arguments are by people with long histories of violence and criminal records......

 

[2aguy]

We have been saying but libs won't listen. Rigoursly enforce the existing laws instead of finding new ways to release dangerous criminals early. Get rid of gun free zones which attract these lunatics in the first place. Follow the Constitution with national reciprocity. Quit demonizing cops who are simply trying to do their jobs & return to their homes & families. It's not that hard...

Guy, we lock up TWO MILLION PEOPLE. Locking them up doesn't solve much of anything.

Gun free zones keeps arguments over who ate someone's lunch from turning deadly. We need gun free zones because too many assholes are out there with guns.

No, the constitution says "Well-regulated", and for most our history, that means states set their own regulations.

Cops who shoot unarmed children aren't doing their jobs. They are doing the exact oppossite of their jobs. If they are so keen to return home to their families, they need to find something else to do for a living.

No....normal people are not shooting each other....and the few nuts who shoot people in gun free zones aren't paying attention to the gun free zone signs already.

Normal people carrying guns in gun free zones will keep the nuts away...they are looking for a killing field not a gun fight.

 

[2aguy]

Should we tax alcohol for the people who kill other people with cars while drunk? Maybe we should just tax the sales of cars!!!

What is it we require car owners to do to protect other people from accidents caused by another driver? Oh that's right. INSURANCE.
That's what drivers have to pay for their mistakes that cause others to be injured.


And Ray. We already tax the sales of cars. What where you trying to say Ray?

How about requiring gun owners to have insurance Ray?

Nope...requiring insurance would be just like a Poll Tax or literacy test when the democrats tried to keep blacks from exercising their right to vote......the poor who can't afford insurance would be denied their right...won't fly......

 

[2aguy]

No...those people were sent into gas chambers because fools like you allowed themselves to be disarmed in every country in Europe after World War 2.....and since they could not resist...12 million people were murdered from all over Europe...not war dead...simply murdered because the Germans did not like them.....

Hey, guy, every country the Germans invaded, they found a shitload of people who were happy to help.

No twit.....hitler kept in place the gun restrictions created by the Weimar Republic......and used the lists they created when they regisgtered all the guns in the 1920s......he allowed his nazis and their allies to have guns but disarmed any remaining opponents and the Jews....

But if you weren't a Jew, you had no problem getting a gun. The reality was, Germans were generally pretty happy with everything Hitler was doing and pretty much fought for him to the bitter end.

Even the half-ass July 20 Coup was staged by the Army only because Germany was clearly losing the war. And well into the 1950's, people considered the July 20 conspirators to be traitors. Wasnt until the 1970s people started naming shit after Stauffenberg (who wasn't any kind of a hero, really.)

Nope......if you were a political problem for the nazis you could not have a gun....

The gun registration created in the Weimar Republic allowed the nazis to easily disarm the Jews and their enemies....and the disarming of civilians after World War 1 allowed the Germans to murder 12 million innocent men, women and children.

 

[JoeB131]

No....normal people are not shooting each other....and the few nuts who shoot people in gun free zones aren't paying attention to the gun free zone signs already.

Normal people carrying guns in gun free zones will keep the nuts away...they are looking for a killing field not a gun fight.

By "Normal" you mean "white'. Why can't you guys ever say what you mean.

Lanza. Loughner. Holmes. Harris and Kleibold... All White guys from middle class homes.

 

[2aguy]

Your anti-gun ideas are stupid.

Why should gun owners pay for crimes committed by others who use a gun? Should we tax alcohol for the people who kill other people with cars while drunk? Maybe we should just tax the sales of cars!!!

Well you stupid fuck this long term jail time for any crime committed with a gun is not my idea. It is 2ndAmend idea.

But someone has to pay for the increased jails and longer minimum sentences. and that was the topic.

Why should the general public pay much more money for a crime just because a gun was used. And yes crimes with guns now cause longer prison sentences. But usually someone is shot.

2nd A wants 10 years mandatory for first time offender who pistol whips someone. That is assault. 2 years maybe

That longer, mandatory sentences whenever a gun is used for any kind of crime would get expensive fast.

How to pay for that was the topic. Of course you gun nuts don't want to pay for it. You think there are no costs to great to bear to have easy access to guns. But I doubt the non gun lovers would support that idea.

And every time an armed citizen stops a violent criminal they should get paid...right? Since they are saving the public money...right?

 

[2aguy]

And the 1,500,000 Americans actually stopping violent criminal attack are saving Americans even more money......should we give anyone who stops a violent crime a tax break?

Back to this happy horseshit again eh? The correct number is 2.5 million. Or was it 500k? When you look at your favorite surveys, the number is all over the place.

Did you read that survey I found that estimated realistically around 70k legitimate DGUs happened per year?

I know you didn't. It wouldn't fit your fantasy.

Yes...and I showed you that the National Crime Victimization Survey...where that number comes from is not a gun self defense study, doesn't use the word "gun" anywhere in the survey and doesn't ask the people about gun self defense...so yeah...it is a crap study.......

 

[2aguy]

No....normal people are not shooting each other....and the few nuts who shoot people in gun free zones aren't paying attention to the gun free zone signs already.

Normal people carrying guns in gun free zones will keep the nuts away...they are looking for a killing field not a gun fight.

By "Normal" you mean "white'. Why can't you guys ever say what you mean.

Lanza. Loughner. Holmes. Harris and Kleibold... All White guys from middle class homes.

Nope...normal as in not criminals.....those guys are all criminals twit.

 

[JoeB131]

Nope......if you were a political problem for the nazis you could not have a gun....

The gun registration created in the Weimar Republic allowed the nazis to easily disarm the Jews and their enemies....and the disarming of civilians after World War 1 allowed the Germans to murder 12 million innocent men, women and children.

Naw, guy, what allowed them to do it is they had tanks and planes and well organized divisions. The reality was, armed populations are NEVER a match for a well trained army that simply doesn't give a fuck about how many civilians they kill.

It's why you had that town in Czechoslovakia that shot a top Nazi, and the Nazis killed every last person in the town.

 

[2aguy]

Why should the NRA and people who did not use guns to commit crimes be forced to pay a special tax for crimes they did not commit....?

You are all in the same boat. And you wouldn't be paying for the crime. The money would fund the additional jails and long term incarceration.

How come you wouldn't say how you would pay for this idea of yours? You think jails are free?

Why should the general public pay for the long term incarceration of a person who committed a crime using a gun?

In my pistol whipping scenario, you have the guy in jail for 10 years minimum. At what cost? Let's say 50k a year. 500k over 10.

Now if the guy had beaten the girlfriends friend with a stick and didn't kill him, first time offender would have got minimal jail.time for assault.

But because he used a gun , the penalty is much greater and the cost is much greater.

The sellers and buyers of guns and ammo should fund the addition costs of making gun readily available, knowing that a certain amount of crimes committed with a gun will result in much longer jail sentences.

Now maybe the reality of long jail sentences will deter gun crime. Which would make those additional taxes a cheap proposition.
That money could then help people who were gun shot and lived.

But to ask the general public to fund additional jails and longer sentences so you can be tough on gun crime isn't gonna work.

No....you think like a child.....you want people who did not commit a crime, did not use a gun to commit a crime and did nothing wrong to pay a tax for something they did not do.....

That is stupid thinking.....

 

[2aguy]

And the 1,500,000 Americans actually stopping violent criminal attack are saving Americans even more money......should we give anyone who stops a violent crime a tax break?

Back to this happy horseshit again eh? The correct number is 2.5 million. Or was it 500k? When you look at your favorite surveys, the number is all over the place.

Did you read that survey I found that estimated realistically around 70k legitimate DGUs happened per year?

I know you didn't. It wouldn't fit your fantasy.

Thanks for another chance to show the actual research into defensive gun use...

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......1994...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 ( the bill clinton study)

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)....

 

[2aguy]

And the 1,500,000 Americans actually stopping violent criminal attack are saving Americans even more money......should we give anyone who stops a violent crime a tax break?

Back to this happy horseshit again eh? The correct number is 2.5 million. Or was it 500k? When you look at your favorite surveys, the number is all over the place.

Did you read that survey I found that estimated realistically around 70k legitimate DGUs happened per year?

I know you didn't. It wouldn't fit your fantasy.

Lets go with your 70 thousand then, remind me which is greater? 11k or 70k?

it is neither.....he wants to use the National Crime Victimization Survey.....it is not a gun self defense study...it does not have the word "gun" in it...and never asks one question about using a gun for self defense....anti gun nuts want to use it because it is the only study that puts defensive gun use at that low of a number....here are actual studies...

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......1994...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 ( the bill clinton study)

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)....

 

[Obiwan]

No....normal people are not shooting each other....and the few nuts who shoot people in gun free zones aren't paying attention to the gun free zone signs already.

Normal people carrying guns in gun free zones will keep the nuts away...they are looking for a killing field not a gun fight.

By "Normal" you mean "white'. Why can't you guys ever say what you mean.

Lanza. Loughner. Holmes. Harris and Kleibold... All White guys from middle class homes.

Gee, weren't they all white Liberals????

Maybe we should just bar the mentally defective Libs from owning guns!!!!

 

[2aguy]

Nope......if you were a political problem for the nazis you could not have a gun....

The gun registration created in the Weimar Republic allowed the nazis to easily disarm the Jews and their enemies....and the disarming of civilians after World War 1 allowed the Germans to murder 12 million innocent men, women and children.

Naw, guy, what allowed them to do it is they had tanks and planes and well organized divisions. The reality was, armed populations are NEVER a match for a well trained army that simply doesn't give a fuck about how many civilians they kill.

It's why you had that town in Czechoslovakia that shot a top Nazi, and the Nazis killed every last person in the town.

Yeah...tell that to the guys who are making us leave Afghanistan and Iraq.....they had surplus rifles and improvised explosives vs. the greatest military power in the world...and we are leaving...they did it to the second greatest military power, the Russians back in the 80s.........

And Vietnam.....

You are wrong...again.

The people of Europe gave up their guns after World War 1....believiing that their police and military were the only ones who needed guns......and then they allowed 12 million innocent men, women and children to be sent to German gas chambers....because no one was armed to stop them....

Switzerland had 435,000 civilians armed with rifles and ready to fight any invasion...and the Germans did not invade them...the Germans invaded everyone else..but not the civilian armed Swiss......