A law-abiding responsible gun owner strikes again.
A gun can't be locked out because that would render it useless when it's needed most. People have free will. People have killed people for ions. Not to trivialize what happened here, but again the Left is taking one shooting, blowing it out of proportion and labeling all gun owners as crazy and unable to handle a weapon. You could take guns away from mentally ill people (which this woman was - supposedly), but where does that stop? Who doesn't have a history of anxiety or depression? The man who tried to kill Trump had Autism. There's a lot of Aspies here that I would trust with a gun before some NT's. You want a free country - the freedom comes with people being allowed to have guns.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
if nothing changes regarding gun laws then half of the US population gets even more angry and useless and the other half gets even more up their own asses. generally speaking. i want to keep the right to have my guns too but idk what kind of changes would actually work to benefit both humanitarian sides, i just know that possibilities exist. and personally i would not be concerned if it was more difficult to access guns because i'm a rational, non-violent, law-abiding US citizen and that's the literal price of freedom.
People will think up any "excuse" or "reason" to keep their precious guns. But what happens when someone you know (and love) get shot or killed by a gun? Then what? Do you continue to look the other way and spout the same old stuff?
Not trying to attack- just making a point. Enough is enough, there NEEDS to be more background checks, needs to be more restrictions.. period. Lives should be saved, not be at risk because of cowards that don't want to offend NRA and/or other people that are supplying them with hush money, bribe money, etc.
There is plenty of responsible gun owners, but there is plenty of people that shouldn't have guns. There needs to be better laws in place to stop them before crimes happen. Also I strongly feel the wait time to get a gun should be increased. NO EXCUSES.
People think I'm crazy when I say it, but secession would solve all of these problems - guns, abortion, gay rights. States could make their own laws and a person could live in the state of their choosing. That way no certain laws are forced on people against their will. Things would be a lot more peaceful.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
The same as if they were killed by club, blade or fist.
Meaning, I'd blame the murderer, because that's the only person responsible.
The mother is a loon. However what was up?
"Identified As" thru a facebook post. Also had tons of nice stuff on her kids.
The woman is dead so no narrative from her is forthcoming obviously after shooting her kids she decided on suicide by cop.
What was the father's part in this... ?
He is present in the home during the fight. It is his birthday and no one is drunk. How the heck it get so bad?
I will BET money there was a divorce announced (not justification).
Was she just at the party with a gun on her hip? <_<
She ran upstairs for one?
And who said she was responsible? Or law abiding? No former history is known. Maybe she was a juvie girl. Or a gold digger. Or mentally unstable because of depression meds....
I shall with hold harsher judgement for now. I think people that murder their own children are scum.
_________________
FFFFF Captchas.
(This post is to no one in particular that has posted in this thread)
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/25/2 ... gun-owners
The Democratic members of congress literally just filibustered the senate to bring forward a gun control vote.
They also just did a sit in on the house floor in order to bring another measure to vote.
Republicans in Missour repealed their universal background check law, the result was a 25% increase in homicides compared to other states[1]. California and Connecticut saw similar declines in gun deaths and homicides when they enacted universal background check laws[2][3].
The "assault rifle" ban in the 90's resulted in 85% less deaths in mass shootings[4].
Gun control saves lives, republicans need thousands of people need to die so criminals can have the ability to kill 50 people in a minute.
[1]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/13/1589161/study-gun-homicides-increased-25-percent-after-missouri-background-check-laws-repeal/
[2]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26066959
[3]http://scienceblog.com/58818/broader-background-checks-and-denial-criteria-could-help-prevent-mass-shooting-catastrophes/
[4]http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/
She was the typical "law abiding and responsible gun owner" poster child for the NRA, right up until she did this. Gun fanatics are like pit bulls. They never hurt anyone, until they do. Which is why we shouldn't even take this "I'm a responsible gun owner" BS seriously.
"There is one argument, and one argument alone for having a gun, and this is the argument: f**k off, I like guns," - Jim Jefferies
The "assault rifle" ban in the 90's resulted in 85% less deaths in mass shootings[4].
Gun control saves lives, republicans need thousands of people need to die so criminals can have the ability to kill 50 people in a minute.
[1]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/13/1589161/study-gun-homicides-increased-25-percent-after-missouri-background-check-laws-repeal/
[2]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26066959
[3]http://scienceblog.com/58818/broader-background-checks-and-denial-criteria-could-help-prevent-mass-shooting-catastrophes/
[4]http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/
If you can pick and choose you can eventually find something that seems to back you up:
"[4]http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/":
On this site a chart is available to show a temporary increase in gun crimes during the period when so called "assault weapon LIKE" rifles were NOT sold. I'll repeat: The ban on certain weapons did NOT make the gun crime rate (caused by the use of these weapons) go down AT ALL. The test to see if these weapons were related to higher crime rates PROVED there was NO correlation.
Additionally this chart shows after a peak of gun crimes during this period, the rate then fell to historic lows. Not at all what you were trying to propose. Nevertheless your statistics DO show the relative minor roll these semi-automatic rifles play in crime.
Well it's nice you can supply your own day dreams for facts, but no such "facts" exist.
Ten years is enough time to begin to see a correlation AND THERE WAS NONE...THAT'S "THE FACTS". In fact there may have been "negative" correlation.
And not mere speculation. Of all the semi-automatic weapons feared the most I'd say 99% are owned by honest citizens like you or myself. How many of these were used in a criminal manner? How many were used in an illegal manner?
And about the Big Lie calling sporting weapons "assault" weapons? This proves the fallacious intent of the whiners and obviates their argument.
My parents still use an old school rotary phone from the 70's, so does my aunt (they do own cells, but that is their primary phone and most used). The first Mario Bros came out in 85, 30 some years later people still play it, there are still cartridges around and systems to play them on. It takes a lot longer than a decade to knock something out of circulation. Once it's truly out of circulation then you can make a determination of success or failure.
