The Gun Culture is Somewhat In Denial About Gun Safety.

Page 7 of 24 [ 383 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 24  Next

Persimmonpudding
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 294

03 Jan 2015, 1:38 pm

Raptor wrote:
Persimmonpudding wrote:
Raptor wrote:
It's always a rout since they have never and can never bring any valid point to the table. They lose the argument the moment they start it. I feel like a cat batting a blind mouse around each time.
The science actually supports background checks.

You lose.

Background checks arealy are the law at least for dealer transfers.
BTW; saying you have science to prove something doesn't mean diddly. Have you ever heard of junk science?

Quote:
You dopes always miss the most effective argument against tighter gun restrictions: cost. The gun laws that we currently have in force in the US are not bad for return on investment. However, a more extreme set of restrictions would be costly to enforce.

It sounds on the surface like this could be vulnerable to the argument that can't put a dollar value on life until you take into account that money that could be spent on gun bans could also be spent on cancer research or community education aimed at reining in youth violence.

When you take into account that there is only a limited amount of money available to be spent, a moderate stance on gun control starts looking a lot wiser.

We dopes are at least aware that we have a ton of gun control laws on the books. To claim otherwise is usually the cry of the ignorant that there are is no gun control in the United States and the streets are running red with blood.
You seem to have missed the point that I generally support the status quo. However, I am against so-called "stand your ground" laws because they are tantamount to legalized murder and thoroughly asinine, thus my hatred for the NRA's fanclub.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 1:42 pm

I support true stand your ground, like, if someone is in your home and about to harm you you can defend yourself and not face a penalty. I am all for self defense but I also recognize, if someone is trained and skilled enough, they can probably harm you even if you think you are secure.

People must have the right to fight back.



Persimmonpudding
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 294

03 Jan 2015, 1:46 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
The point of this thread is to try to raise awareness and I hope, at least, it will do that. It's not really about gun control. More about educating people to be more careful. I did not start this thread as a platform for gun control v. none.

I started this thread in hopes people would think, where is my gun? Is it in a good location?
Sounds like several threads I have tried to start elsewhere, where I attempted to explain the role of law enforcement initiatives in curbing gun violence. You cannot have a discussion on this general topic without there being more discussion and grandstanding around the topic of gun politics. It is an asinine holy war that will ultimately make about as much sense as the war over the name of what is currently called Israel.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 1:49 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
The point of this thread is to try to raise awareness and I hope, at least, it will do that. It's not really about gun control. More about educating people to be more careful. I did not start this thread as a platform for gun control v. none.

I started this thread in hopes people would think, where is my gun? Is it in a good location?
Sounds like several threads I have tried to start elsewhere, where I attempted to explain the role of law enforcement initiatives in curbing gun violence. You cannot have a discussion on this general topic without there being more discussion and grandstanding around the topic of gun politics. It is an asinine holy war that will ultimately make about as much sense as the war over the name of what is currently called Israel.

There's really no point because people are going to have guns. I think the problem is, a handful of women choose weapons they can easily utilize in an emergency then they get somewhat careless about their storage.

That is the true topic of this thread.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

03 Jan 2015, 1:49 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
If you don't want to be lectured or insulted, then don't wax arrogant about how you are going to create a "rout." Do you realize how ridiculous that kind of rhetoric makes you sound? Former Iranian president Ahmadinejad had greater humility and better sense.


Oh, insult away, just try and make them accurate insults, I hate ignorance. I also didn't say anything about creating a rout, I was observing the simple fact of it. Double also, you're attacking me personally and not my points, not usually the harbinger of a strong argument. I've laid out my position, attack that if you think I'm wrong.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 1:49 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
The point of this thread is to try to raise awareness and I hope, at least, it will do that. It's not really about gun control. More about educating people to be more careful. I did not start this thread as a platform for gun control v. none.

I started this thread in hopes people would think, where is my gun? Is it in a good location?
Sounds like several threads I have tried to start elsewhere, where I attempted to explain the role of law enforcement initiatives in curbing gun violence. You cannot have a discussion on this general topic without there being more discussion and grandstanding around the topic of gun politics. It is an asinine holy war that will ultimately make about as much sense as the war over the name of what is currently called Israel.

There's really no point because people are going to have guns. I think the problem is, a handful of women choose weapons they can easily utilize in an emergency then they get somewhat careless about their storage.

That is the true topic of this thread.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 1:50 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Persimmonpudding wrote:
If you don't want to be lectured or insulted, then don't wax arrogant about how you are going to create a "rout." Do you realize how ridiculous that kind of rhetoric makes you sound? Former Iranian president Ahmadinejad had greater humility and better sense.


Oh, insult away, just try and make them accurate insults, I hate ignorance. I also didn't say anything about creating a rout, I was observing the simple fact of it. Double also, you're attacking me personally and not my points, not usually the harbinger of a strong argument. I've laid out my position, attack that if you think I'm wrong.



Do not insult on this thread and try to talk about gun safety issues. I would appreciate it.

We have to think, lives could be at stake. What if someone is in a similar situation and happens upon this topic and then puts their gun in a better location or something similar that ends up sparing them a calamity?



Last edited by ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo on 03 Jan 2015, 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

03 Jan 2015, 1:53 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Raptor,
I found it disturbing because it involves a two year old child killing a parent which is something most of them cannot do unless they have access to firearms.

Maybe you should stop following the news so closely, or at least do so less selectively.

Quote:
I have always heard stories about young children getting their hands on guns and shooting themselves or another child but never one where they killed their own parents.

Small children die of all kinds of causes to include poisoning, falls, electrocution, drowning, vehicular accidents, illness, abuse, medical malpractice, etc....
The comparative few that die from a bullet are not any more dead then from other causes.

Quote:
So, I am wondering, will everyone who owns a gun finally wake up to better security for their weapon after this case?

No, my guns are as secure as they need to be. I secure my guns primarily to safeguard against theft. Personally, I consider carrying a handgun in a purse to be dumber than hell but I'm not willing to pass a law that gives the cops and the courts something else to use to screw with people.

Quote:
You would think it would alarm any parent who has a handgun with a light trigger.

What's the legal definition of a "light trigger"?
You're so far over your head here that you'll need 10X binoculars just to see the sky.

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Let's all be nice because I don't want my topic closed. I must insist. NO INSULTS!

You can argue about gun safety but please, no calling anyone names.

You started this thread knowing from experience how it would pan out so whatever happens you bear at least partial responsibility for. :shameonyou:


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 1:57 pm

Raptor,

Not sure if there is a legal definition of a light trigger. One that two year olds can pull? In these two cases, the guns belonged to women so they could have chosen ones that are easier to fire because women are like that, sometimes, and they want to be prepared.

And as far as your guns are concerned, if they are in a good location, fine, this topic isn't really about you. It's for those people that carry their guns in their purses or leave them loaded on the coffee table with kids around.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

03 Jan 2015, 1:57 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
Never mind on the wait. His internal alarm woke him up for his Gunsmoke.

Robert F. Williams obtained a charter from the NRA to start his gun-club, but this would have had nothing to do with the views of the NRA's General membership.

The NRA simply did not participate directly in the politics of skin color, and there was nothing to say a Klansman could not have applied for a similar charter.

So, are you backing away from your claim that "the first gun control laws were actually promoted by the NRA in order to keep black people from owning guns"? The NRA has always advocated states' rights even when some states choose to restrict the firearm rights of minorities (something that the founders of the NRA abhorred). Individuals within the NRA would certainly have their opinions about race especially in the Reconstructionist South. State governments and their elected officials would similarly have their opinions. But, when it comes to the NRA as its own institution, I believe that the evidence shows how its earliest leaders were quite accommodating to their black members particularly at a time when Jim Crow laws were adopted.

While on this subtopic, I should point out that the current NRA includes top-gun Chris Cheng https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Cheng who is its openly gay commentator and spokesman. Other, non-NRA, Second Amendment groups include African American Hunting Association LLC, Amendment II Democrats, Armed Liberals, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership, Oregon Democratic Gun Owners Caucus, Pink Pistols and Women Against Gun Control, among many other non-traditional firearm groups. My own Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah continues to be one of the largest LGBT Second Amendment groups in the United States.

I choose to view the NRA and other groups by what they do today.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


Last edited by AspieUtah on 03 Jan 2015, 1:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Persimmonpudding
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 294

03 Jan 2015, 1:58 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
I support true stand your ground, like, if someone is in your home and about to harm you you can defend yourself and not face a penalty. I am all for self defense but I also recognize, if someone is trained and skilled enough, they can probably harm you even if you think you are secure.

People must have the right to fight back.
They are called "castle laws," but they are a far cry from laws that allow someone to walk after stalking and then shooting an unarmed teenager.

I actually see a hatchet as a more effective defensive weapon in close quarters. I have both a hatchet and a Colt revolver, and I am more likely to reach for the bladed weapon if invaded.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 2:00 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
I support true stand your ground, like, if someone is in your home and about to harm you you can defend yourself and not face a penalty. I am all for self defense but I also recognize, if someone is trained and skilled enough, they can probably harm you even if you think you are secure.

People must have the right to fight back.
They are called "castle laws," but they are a far cry from laws that allow someone to walk after stalking and then shooting an unarmed teenager.

I actually see a hatchet as a more effective defensive weapon in close quarters. I have both a hatchet and a Colt revolver, and I am more likely to reach for the bladed weapon if invaded.

I understand your anger and concern, however, this topic isn't about those types of laws. I know you dislike them and think they are dangerous and want to express your concern but I want to talk about gun safety issues. You can start a thread on Stand Your Ground if you like.



Persimmonpudding
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 294

03 Jan 2015, 2:07 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
So, are you backing away from your claim that "the first gun control laws were actually promoted by the NRA in order to keep black people from owning guns"
Your use of the phrasing "backing away" is intentionally provocative, and it is a fact, not merely a claim.

Here is a good article discussing it.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

03 Jan 2015, 2:35 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Raptor,

Not sure if there is a legal definition of a light trigger. One that two year olds can pull? In these two cases, the guns belonged to women so they could have chosen ones that are easier to fire because women are like that, sometimes, and they want to be prepared.

And as far as your guns are concerned, if they are in a good location, fine, this topic isn't really about you. It's for those people that carry their guns in their purses or leave them loaded on the coffee table with kids around.

The only way to address your concerns here is to say that s**t happens. I know someone whose wife actually ran over herself with her own car, believe it or not. It did not make the news. One two year old capping his/her mother with her own handgun is a local tragedy at best and worthy of nothing more.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 Jan 2015, 2:40 pm

Raptor wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Raptor,

Not sure if there is a legal definition of a light trigger. One that two year olds can pull? In these two cases, the guns belonged to women so they could have chosen ones that are easier to fire because women are like that, sometimes, and they want to be prepared.

And as far as your guns are concerned, if they are in a good location, fine, this topic isn't really about you. It's for those people that carry their guns in their purses or leave them loaded on the coffee table with kids around.

The only way to address your concerns here is to say that s**t happens. I know someone whose wife actually ran over herself with her own car, believe it or not. It did not make the news. One two year old capping his/her mother with her own handgun is a local tragedy at best and worthy of nothing more.

None of that has anything to do with this. I would say to these people to be cognizant of where their weapon is as much as possible. Nobody's perfect but just think about what's at stake. Once that bullet goes into your head that's it. There's no going back. So think about that.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

03 Jan 2015, 2:48 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
I support true stand your ground, like, if someone is in your home and about to harm you you can defend yourself and not face a penalty. I am all for self defense but I also recognize, if someone is trained and skilled enough, they can probably harm you even if you think you are secure.

People must have the right to fight back.
They are called "castle laws," but they are a far cry from laws that allow someone to walk after stalking and then shooting an unarmed teenager.

Trying to breath life back into the Treyvon Martin / George Zimmerman fiasco are we? Between when it happened and the trail and then some we hashed that out for months here. Go back and look them up. As I recall, the gun haters, race baiters, and protectionists in general seem to have had their asses handed to them again.

Quote:
I actually see a hatchet as a more effective defensive weapon in close quarters. I have both a hatchet and a Colt revolver, and I am more likely to reach for the bladed weapon if invaded.

Depends on the scenario and the skill of the user. Some people cannot hit even the ground with a handgun and would be better off with a hatchet.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson