E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Most Americans support the right to use deadly force to protect themselves -- even in public places -- and have a favorable view of the National Rifle Association, the main gun-lobby group, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.
However, there was also strong support from respondents for background checks as well as limiting the sale of automatic weapons and keeping guns out of churches, stores and workplaces.
The online survey showed that 68 percent, or two out of three respondents, had a favorable opinion of the NRA, which starts its annual convention in St. Louis, Missouri, on Friday.
Eighty-two percent of Republicans saw the gun lobbying group in a positive light as well as 55 percent of Democrats, findings that run counter to the perception of Democrats as anti-NRA.
Most of the 1,922 people surveyed nationwide from April Monday through Thursday said they supported laws that allow Americans to use deadly force to protect themselves from danger in their own home or in a public place.
"Americans do hold to this idea that people should be allowed to defend themselves and using deadly force is fine, in those circumstances," said pollster Chris Jackson. "In the theoretical ... there's a certain tolerance of vigilantism."
The poll was conducted amid a nationwide debate over gun rights and race after the Florida shooting of an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood crime watch volunteer who is white and Hispanic.
The poll results were welcomed by the NRA, which is one of the most powerful lobby groups in the country and regularly clashes with anti-gun groups and often with Democrats as it seeks to protect and expand gun rights across the United States.
"Regardless of how others try to distort our position, the general public knows where we stand," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "It shows the failure of the continuing efforts of many to try and discredit the National Rifle Association."
Mitt Romney, the likely Republican presidential nominee, spoke to the convention on Friday, vowing to reverse what he calls the restrictive gun policies of President Barack Obama's administration.
Romney sticks to broad attack on Obama in NRA speech
"We need a president who will stand up for the rights of hunters, sportsmen, and those seeking to protect their homes and their families," he said. "President Obama has not. I will."
Eighty-seven percent of respondents -- with high numbers among both Republicans and Democrats -- supported the use of deadly force to protect themselves from danger in their home.
Two-thirds said they backed laws permitting the use of deadly force to protect themselves in public.
Gun restrictions needed, most say
According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, nearly 100,000 people are shot every year in the United States in murders, suicides, accidents or police intervention.
Government statistics show 31,347 people died in the United States in 2009 from gunshots, including 11,493 in homicides.
Ninety-one percent of those who responded to the survey agreed on the need for background checks before a firearm can be sold. Only 6 percent said they thought gun ownership should require no, or very few restrictions.
Nearly three-quarters of respondents said they supported limiting the sale of automatic weapons, and 62 percent oppose bringing firearms into churches, workplaces or stores.
"A fairly large number of Americans support strong regulation, or at least moderate regulation of gun ownership," said Jackson. "Which is sort of counter to the narrative you often hear that legislators can't touch our guns or you'll have to pay."
Nearly half of those surveyed felt crime rates were rising where they lived - even though FBI statistics show that violent crime has declined for the past 4 1/2 years.
NYTimes: NRA gathers amid growing storm over gun laws
"People's perception of crime always over-represents reality," said Jackson. "I think that indicates the mind frame that the American public is in - there's always a constant low-level worrying about street crime."
As a result, 85 percent of those polled said they did not believe police could stop all crime and 77 percent felt regular people had to "step up" to help prevent crime from happening.
The survey included 650 Republicans, 752 Democrats and 520 independents. The precision of the Reuters/Ipsos online poll is measured using a credibility interval and this poll has a credibility interval of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points for all respondents.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Zimmerman to seek bond in Trayvon Martin case
- Newark Mayor Corey Booker saves neighbor from fire
- 3 killed at Ohio Cracker Barrel
- 4 feet of hail in Texas? Photos, reports cause quite a storm
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.
Leave a Comment:
Regarding the so-called Stand your Ground laws, if the shooting had been the other way around, Trayvon killing George Zimmerman, would the law have worked the same way? Trayvon was approached by an aggressive person threatening him, and, obviously, should have been afraid for his life. If he had been carrying a weapon and had used it, would the case have been handled the same way? Seems like he certainly would have been in the right in Florida to shoot. Guess it's almost whomever shoots first as long as they can show threat?
you see, half of the country supports the NRA, but if you look at the individual policies the NRA backs, the support is much smaller.
where have i heard this before? oh yes.
ACA. conservatives hate it, but when you look at the individual policies there, they support most of them.
this is actually true of the republican party. if you get down to the nitty gritty of republican policies, most people wouldnt actually support it. they only do so because there is an R- attached to it.
Restrict the right to own guns by gang bangers and drug dealers and 99% of gun crime will vanish.
Let´s support the National Cyanide Assn or the National Heroin Assn. That makes as much sense as supporting the NRA.Guns are a national sickness in the U.S and and an extremely deadly one.!!
How many of NRA guns have been sold to drug dealers, organized crime, terrorists, war criminals, crimes agains ethnic minorities.
Well you guessed it right - the answer is most of them. Why? Because they can afford to pay more than common man.
If the action had been reversed, Trayvon might be protected by the Stand Your Ground law. As it is, Zimmerman shouldn't come under the law because it specifically excludes those who initiate confrontations.
There is a difference between asking someone "what are you doing here" and pummelling them.
Florida statute 776.013(3) says: (a) person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
You cannot shoot somebody for asking you a question. You can if they're pummelling you. Since Zimmermen was underneath Martin He could not retreat if he wanted to he could have used self defense even if stand your ground laws were not in effect.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/article1222930.ece
What's really scary is that more people are going to start carrying because they're afraid of the rabid NRA gunners. The dimwit gunners are the guys who are just looking for a chance to pull out their great big gun and blow up bad guys a la Zimmerman. These are the guys who think they can draw out that great big gun in a crowded mall, and put a hole in the middle of some bad guy's forehead at 25-yards.
These guys are nuts. They're the LAST people who should be allowed to carry.
Yeah, we have a problem with guns. At some point, you'd think people would smack the crap out of the idiot who says, "Dude, guns don't kill people. People kill people." Hey dimwit, your BS platitude isn't stopping the killing.
Our rights to bear gun is protected under the constitution and with multiples rules from the Supreme Court , stroking down anti-constitutional laws that violate our 2nd Amendment most of this laws coming from the left, but who show to be more dangerous, who are the ones that promote violence in the street, who are the ones that riot and destroy private property, who are the ones that attack our public servants , the ones that protect us, Molotov bombs are ok , but bear guns for legal owners is not. 90 % or more killed with guns come from delinquents, that get the guns in the black market not from legal sellers.
Americans need to realize that the go tvernment will never be able to enforce any law that says that they can come into your home and take your firearms away from you. Not possible. There are too many firearms in the U.S. So any politician that says another politician has not done enough to secure your rights to gun ownership is completely out of touch with reality and is only trying to scare you into believing that they and they alone will be able to save you from the non-existent Gun Satan that is not going to take your firearms away from you.
This is 2012 and not the 1770's.
Americans have the right to own and posses firearms because it keeps criminals who otherwise secure for theirselves weapons illegally in check. If Americans did not have the right to possess firearms then the criminal element would be running America.
The sad thing is though those same criminals also have the right to own and possess a firearm until the time at which they use it in a criminal manner.
If guns make us safe, why isn't the US the safest nation in the world?
I'm so scared of guns. why don't we all just get rid of our guns and then everybody will be safe. haha yeah right.
Charlie-1915998 and Joe-402558: Guns don't make anyone safe. What makes people as safe as they can be (key thought) is timely, skillful intervention, whether with or without weapons, but always supported by wisdom.
Some with nothing but their wits survive a lethal confrontation; others don't, no matter how great their skill or armaments. War is a perfect example of how everything for which one is armed, may never show up; while the moment takes itself to some obscure venue that even the most skilled, and best-armed can't survive.
The sound of a Mossberg loaded in the dark, safety off, is a deterrent to some would-be criminals. To others, it's only an invitation to speed up your own impending disaster, for which nothing, gun or not, will prepare you.
The law you are talking about does not apply period! Read the entire law. How many of you are basing your opinion on what others claim. The author, in Florida, of the law has publicly stated this is not the purpose of the law. The governor that signed it into law has also said this law does not apply.
So, what's this all about? It is all about getting the black vote to return to Obama. Obama knows he has done nothing to help blacks, thus the need to create an "issue". It's all about getting Obama re-elected. As additional proof, the DNC and Congressional Black Caucus are using the death of a child to further their own goals. Just a Sharpton and Jackson are using "the issue" for thier own profit.
On the other hand, BHO had been good for America in one way. Never before have so many Americans been buying guns, or upgrading their guns. Americans know full well Obama's objective is to disarm all Americans. So, how does BHO envision getting around our constitution or the 25,000 laws on the books on guns. He and Hillary Clinton have went to the UN and asked that they draft a law to control American guns. Note: They want to impose this law of the US. Think UN would impose such a law on (say) Pakistan, Iran, Syria? - Not!
1hucares, I like your post. It is well said! I would also like to add, since I am a gun owner myself. I do use common sense, why would someone think that a gun owner would just shoot someone walking on their lawn or even standing at the front door? I would first try to find out why, since it is my property. They might be someone in need of help. Just cause I own guns doesn't mean I lack brains and common sense.
America would be the safest country in the world if we had the fewist minorities in the world !!!
That bit of information is news to me. I've been following this circus quite intently and the only concrete evidence I'm aware of is:
Zimmerman was watching the neighborhood and spotted someone suspicious.
Zimmerman called 911 and reported it.
Zimmerman continued to follow Martin against the advice of the dispatcher. (By the way, not a crime.)
An eyewitness spotted Martin on top of Zimmerman, punching him and slamming his head on the ground.
Another witness heard someone crying out for help.
Zimmerman shot Martin killing him.
If Martin felt threatened, wouldn't the natural reaction be to flee and not attack? Of course it would. Do you think a 17 year old, 6' tall, black athlete would have had any trouble escaping from a short, pudgy, out of shape man? Of course not. I don't think Martin was afraid at all, but pissed off and decided he could kick Zimmerman's ass.
According to Martin's background and tweets found on his phone, he was a trouble maker and a thief. A thug. According to Zimmerman's background, he was a decent guy. No evidence of violence or racism. Other than this, we don't know why a gun was drawn and discharged. We weren't there.
Zimmerman may not have been to bright, but there was no murderous intent, therefore no murder. If you intended on killing someone you spotted in your neighborhood, would you call 911?
@idtlc, you have to realize your mistake in the role reversal of trayvon and george and stand your ground. Had trayvon had a gun and shot george he'd be in alot more trouble then george, why, well follow me on this, he's only 17 and if i'm correct you must be at least 21 to own a handgun, which means he would have already been breaking the law, he would not have been able to have a carry conceal permit either since again he was under 21 and not permitted to even have a handgun on his person by means of open carry or concealment. Hand trayvon been carring a gun when this happen, he might still be alive, but he would have been locked up from the git go from illegally possesion of a firearm to start, which would have led to more charges off the bat for murder and so forth.
I just don't get why he carried a gun outside his own home. Sounds to me like he was looking for trouble.
As for people having the right to bear arms. If someone has never been convicted of using the gun to rob someone, or with intent to cause bodily harm to someone who is not agressively threatening you. We have the right to own AND; with the right permit and training, carry a gun.
@Zaruski
Isn't that how politics should be? Instead Democrats blindly listen to their party like a cult. Politics REALLY SHOULD be about "I like this policy. Hate this one." to create a dynamic party that eliminates the bad parts of its policies and embrace new ideas.
What worked 50 years ago may not work today. We should be dynamic, changing, open to new ideas and methods. What you described is a world I want to live in. So yeah, I'll keep supporting the Republican party as long as they keep challenging their beliefs, unlike the Democratic cult that dangles the dollar in front of poor people and asks them to blindly follow whatever tripe they spit out. Its a pretty solid fact that most Democrats aren't even sure what their party actually believes in. Look back at the 2008 Presidential Race when people were voting for Obama because he's "Pro-Life" and "Wants to keep our troops in Iraq to finish the job." Please... Spare me.
The gist of this whole debate is the term "responsible gun ownership." Tough talking idiots who continually rant about how they can't wait to use it on the first person that crosses them is not responsible enough to own a jack knife, let alone a firearm. And the biggest joke are the ones who think they're needed in case of a government takeover. Yea, right. Like that little 9mm is going to stop a trained professional with an M-16.
I don't think so. I carry all the time and hope I never have to use my weapon, but there's an old saying; "Better to have a gun and not need it than to need one and not have it."
.
"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as
the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral
check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally,
even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist
and triumph over them. " - "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States", Justice Story (appointed to the Supreme Court as an Associate Justice by James Madison in 1811
Why do you think liberals are relentless in their efforts to ban the sale of assault weapons? They know a well armed citizenry poses the biggest threat to their agenda of total control. Why do you think the first thing Hitler did was to disarm the German citizens and build a massive military and national constabulary, like Obama hopes to have?
Do you still think these people are crazy?
No, but you are. And a little paranoid as well. The last thing I want available to a "well armed public" is automatic weapons. Man, you better stop watching those movies.
I believe the founders understood full-well of the evils of tyranny by unscrupulous rulers. Why do you think the Second Amendment exists in the first place?
If agreeing with the founders on the purpose for the Second Amendment is "crazy", I'll take that as a compliment, Tony. It's people like you who wake up one day and find they've lost their country.
zaruski
Just wanted to point out that pushing 70% isn't exactly what you'd call "half"
LOL! Surely you are not suggesting it is any different for democrats are you? Look at Obamacare, most support the idea of universal health care but when you "get down to the nitty gritty" most people oppose Obamacare. BOTH parties are full of mindless drones who do nothing other than look for the "R" or the "D" before they decide whether or not to support something. Please don't call out the "other guys" without also criticizing those in your own party lest you come off sounding like a hypocrite.
Do you really believe that the only reason we've kept our freedom is because of the Second Amendment? You sound like a decent educated, stand up dude, yet you let your guard down with all of this paranoia.
Not only did I made a sizable donation, but made myself a life member............
Not surprising really. The US ranks 14th. in the world in reading, 17th. in science, and 25th. in math. A couple of generations ago we were No. 1 in the world. Americans have become VERY stupid people on the whole. When you live in a world of ignorance and fear you see everyone as the enemy and think that by owning a gun you're going to protect yourself or your family. Not likely, but I guess it gives you a false sense of security. So America continues on its downward spiral. Someone in Washington better come up with a way to better education the children of the future before the whole country becomes a bunch of fat, lazy, whiny rednecks.
NRA = Domestic Terrorist Organization
Wild Bill,
Let's assume you are right and Martin was pummeling you and you had a gun. Wouldn't an alternative be to pull the gun out and announce you have it--"I have a gun. Stop or I will shoot." This man had a concealed weapon which emboldened him to pursue and confront a teen boy. Had he pulled the gun out ahead of the confrontation, or had he pulled a rifle out of his truck, the boy probably would have not approached Zimmerman. Let's be clear here. An unarmed boy, walking home alone (no gang, no weapon of any kind, not committing a crime) was killed by a man who pursued him with a concealed firearm. Why does that not bother you?
Who do you think gave us this educational system? The know-it-alls in Washington D.C.. The same ones who gave us a $15.6 trillion dollar debt and $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Who gave us the "Great Society" which has been a complete failure. Who gave us Medicare and Social Security, both of which they've raided and are now bankrupt. Who gave us the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("Stimulus" package), also a complete failure. And, soon to come, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) which neither protects the patient or reduces health care costs. The Congressional Budget Office recently announced that "Obamacare" is expected to cost DOUBLE the original price tag!
Don't you understand, Kaci, Washington isn't the answer, it's the very place our problems were born. You know the difference between now and "a couple of generations ago?......"
LESS GOVERNMENT!!!
Pure speculation, B7.
First, let's drop the "boy" description. Martin may have only been 17 and a minor "legally", but Martin was a man physically and more than capable of dominating Zimmerman, according to an eyewitness.
I don't believe, for a second, that Zimmerman intended to use deadly force. If he had, he wouldn't have waited for Martin to give him an ass-whoopin' before pulling his gun out. It makes no sense. Like you stated, he would have drawn his weapon first, then asked questions later.
Put it this way. If you were intimidated by someone following you at night, would you turn around and attack them, or high-tail it outta there? You know the answer. You'd split because you don't know if the person has a knife, hammer, gun.... whatever.
Like I said before, I don't think that Martin was intimidated in the least. In fact, he was probably emboldened by the obvious physical advantage he had over Zimmerman, so he chose an altercation.
I believe they both made bad choices. Zimmerman should have let Martin go and let the police respond, and Martin should have run and not attacked if he felt threatened.
So, meanest one, let me follow your line of reasoning.
You believe the National Rifle Association which fights for American's citizens' Second Amendment Rights is a domestic terrorist organization. Therefore, you must consider the founders of the United States of America to be domestic terrorists for giving the us the right to keep and bear arms. Am I wrong?
The reason the Second Amendment was authored was to protect the citizens from tyrannical leaders who may try to take total control of us. One of the greatest, most recent examples of this was in Nazi Germany. One of Hitler's first objectives was to pass gun-control laws that would, in effect, render his foes defenseless. 21 million people were murdered by the Nazis and that doesn't include the casualties of WWII. The Nazis relentlessly and ruthlessly disarmed their German opponents. They feared the Jews, many of whom were front-line veterans of WWI, so much that Jews were even disarmed of knives and old sabers.
Genocide almost always follows after a country's citizens are disarmed.
cgr
Your posts are well thought out and well written. It is truly refreshing to see some intelligence on here for a change.
Thank you.
If you don't have a criminal record you should be able to carry just about anywhere you want.
Christenings, weddings, Uncle Fred's funeral, the neighbor child's birthday party, the grocery store, church services....all the places the usual threat to society hangs out.
mcb... The short answer is yes... all of those places.
I gather you have never read about robberies or assaults taking place at churches. So I guess those ladies at choir practice must have experienced a group hypnosis. Or what about the shootings at funerals? Although I will admit I've never been to a gangbangers funeral nor would I wish to, there ARE law abiding people at those even if the guy/girl shot was a slime ball.
And I gather you've never heard about people being assaulted in grocery store or shopping center parking lots.
It must be very nice living in your little world. Do you ever come out into the sunshine? Try it sometime, it's invigorating. Just hope that in the event you do happen upon a scumbag, someone like me is around to protect your sorry little life.
I'm surprised there's this much support for gun rights. I'm fairly neutral about it myself, having just a revolver my dad gave me, but I'd always envisioned most Americans as suburbanites with maybe a gun or two they fired on a shooting range combined with the occasional hunting trip. I sure didn't think most people were for carrying the things around all the time or that there was so much support for the NRA. Guess I need to update my assumptions.
AG99, I consider myself fairly liberal on most issues but I have a CCW license as does my daughter and her husband. We all carry when we go out somewhere because you'll never know if that one time you leave your weapon at home will be the one time you would ever need it. I was brought up with guns in the home and knew from a young age that they were dangerous if improperly handled and so I was taught by my father the proper safety precautions for them. As my own daughter grew I did the same for her and we plan to do the same our her daughter when she gets a few years older.
That said however I am all for background checks and keeping weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill and people with EPO's in effect. However the person should get all their gun rights restored when the EPO is lifted as well.
XDm9mm: That's the kind of paranoid talk that makes me afraid to go anywhere near someone like you.
There are gangbangers at the funerals you go to? Criminals at your church? If you know that, why go? If your life is really that much in danger every day, I feel sorry for you. It's only a matter of time before you get shot, since the world you live in is that dangerous. Eventually you will let your guard down at the wrong moment.
If I felt that way about the world, I'd never leave the house. Just having a gun on me wouldn't be protection enough. I might see one threat coming and be able to shoot just in time, but I might not see another one.
mcb - Loved your post. These are paranoid crazies are looking for trouble.
bbrit I agree with you but everything you do today is a crime.
If they think your not feeding your horse enough, that's a felony. Kennedy tries to take his own son out of the hosiptial, thats a felony. I could go on. My point is, just because you've been arrested doesn't mean you you shouldn't be able to own a gun. And if you ever get arrested for anything, I'll bet it will be a felony.
Gotta love the gun grabbing sissies that "vote" their own comments up.
All you have to do is look at history: When a government wants control of the people there is one easy way to do that-take away their right to own a gun. Our founding fathers knew this, and actually saw this, and is the reason they wrote it into the Constitution. The first amendment is the right to free speech and religion - very important but notice what was SECOND!! Not fourth. Not eighth. Not tenth. Not "oh by the way it might be a good idea if..." but SECOND!! That means the founding fathers recognized that the SECOND most important topic to the success of this great nation is the "right to keep and bear arms". SECOND MOST IMPORTANT!! And they knew this for a reason. If the government has complete control of the population then all it takes is for a few officials with unreasonable desires for power and a country can turn into a dictatorship, a socialist society, or even a country like IRAN or North Korea.
And let's not forget the importance of an armed population. Let's assume for a moment that we were attacked by another country on our own soil. And let's FURTHER assume that this attack is overpowering our military and down the street comes your enemy. What are we supposed to do them? Just HAND them our women and children? Just let them execute people in the streets? You gun control nuts just don't study history do you? This type of thing has been happening all over the world for centuries. You live in this tiny bubble and say "I trust the government and they will protect me". But what if they abuse their power? What if they find themselves unable to protect the people? Wouldn't you want even the opportunity to protect your family? Don't you think any country considering attacking would ALSO think about the 75 million gun owners and 300 million guns owned by the people? And realize they will lose untold lives trying to attack our country?
You need to wake up and smell the coffee and understand that you can't rely on government and must rely on yourself and your fellow citizens. I am PROUD to be a gun owner and PROUD to carry my gun everywhere legally allowed. And when YOU get attacked and you only have an oven mitt for protection you will be GLAD that I am carrying and saves your sorry wimpy butt.
ProBusiness is right!
Save your money on guns and just buy a penis pump and some viagra to solve your manhood problems
sean, since you are so @!$%#ing smart, please tell us which countries have better economies, lower crime, and not nearly as many "warriors"...
don't worry, i wont hold my breath waiting for a answer.
bbritt
"If you don't have a criminal record you should be able to carry just about anywhere you want."
Believe it or not, it is against Military Policy to have weapons in a Military Medical Facility.
The Kid in Texas comes to mind who tried to sell his handgun in Church. He didn't make sure that there was no round in the chamber and ended up accidentally killing a girl in that Church when it discharged through a wall and went into her head.
There are certain policies in place for good reason. I believe in Legal Gun Ownership, but I don't believe in Ginning up Vigilantes and Irresponsible people to buy more guns.
Some food for thought...
Simply, They can take the gun from my cold dead hand.
Come and get it.
I support the right to own guns and according to the poll so do most Americans. I agree with background checks. I believe in the 2nd amendment.
America would be the safest country in the world if we had the fewist minorities in the world , just look at the minority population in those countries !!!!
The population of the United States is approx. 305,689,000.
This survey had 1,922 respondent to it's questions. Now, I'm no mathematician, but that is waaaaaaaay less then 50%. It's silly to say the majority of Americans agree with something or the other based off of a very small finding in a survey. Statistics like this are very misleading and anyone who doesn't bother to question it, will just believe what they see off of face value and MSNBC should have worded it a lot better, as in "In a 2012 US poll the majority of respondents support NRA...". I support gun laws and believe people have the right to bear arms. I also very strongly believe that there should be very strong mandates along with that right to minimize those guns getting into dangerous and idiotic people's hands.
Johnny N. enough with that old and played out reasoning for why America has the most crime in the Western world, not the whole world, but the Western world, here's a hint for you to get your brain going... it's because America has the most PEOPLE in the west than any other western country. Other western countries have way less population period then us. Not to mention if you look into a lot of other countries crime studies, a lot more crime goes unreported in European countries then it does here. Specially crimes against women and hate crimes for fear of retaliation or in the case of women, most times than not, they know the person as well.
Bottom line, don't believe everything at face value, ESPECIALLY statistics.
@starsailing --- How's your limp deek hanging? Hope must be on he horizon since you've discovered the penis pump and Viagra. Bet your mate will be happy if they're still there.
sleepsWithbear
All I can suggest to you is to learn to comprehend what you read.
I INDICATED I don't go to gang-bangers funerals. In fact I don't go to church with the exception of a wedding, christening, funeral or other gathering like that. And then only as a show of support to the people and families involved.
Sean 336944
Sorry Sean... hardly scared. Cautious and prudent. Unfortunately, the dirt-bags of society don't care about social norms, nor the right of people to live their lives per those norms.
I don't know what fantasy land you live in. I live in the real world. Fortunately there has only been one time where I've had need to draw my firearm. Fortunately I was there and in a position, being armed to intervene. If I had not been there, the "youth" might well have succeeded in kicking the elderly man to death.
Sean, if you have the foresight to see and know when evil, in the guise of societies dirt-bags, want to do you and yours harm, please enlighten me. Tell me how I can learn those skills. Teach them to the police and other law enforcement authorities. It would be a truly wonderful world if NO-ONE had to worry about cretins like that ever again.
The amount of guns and the increasing laxity of laws governing them in our country is obscene - we also have largest number of violent crimes in the world. We have the most guns, and a FAR-too-lax manner of getting/registering them - in many cases, they're not registered at all. England and many other countries have peaceful, prosperous economies, while not being armed to the teeth. It has been proven, time and again, that violence begets violence. Guns have their place - - with law enforcement, for hunting IF you want/need to put food on the table. I see far too many "hunters" just hanging out in the woods drinking booze and shooting at anything that moves - for the "fun" of it. (I never understood the urge to kill small, innocent animals just for the "FUN" of it - indicates a twisted psyche). My Dad, who served honorably as a Marine during WWII (3 bronze stars, 5 medals) taught me to shoot, and I'm quite good. I do have a registered gun, and if someone threatened my family with death, I would have no hesitation to shoot. Being armed to the teeth, however, is no guarantee of "safety" - indeed, it's just the opposite.
I love the references to the UK being more peaceful because they have no guns. lol...try checking the actual stats. UK has a crazy high crime rate, higher than the US. Why...because nobody is legally allowed to defend themselves (not even with mace or a stungun) and all persons are defenseless. Pretty cool if your a criminal.
Also, please....all the refs o Trayvon. This case is still under litigation. You dont know the facts anymore than I do. What would you say if he is acquitted? But then again...when the left wing news media shows (and continues to show) a picture of a 12 year old boy , who looks like he is about 8 years ol) and says...."look who they shot!". Only problem is, the actual Trayvon is 6'3" tall, with his entire upper body covered in tattoos an a mouth full of gold teeth. Why would they show you a picture of him when he was 12? Simple, because it fits the agenda.
He, if the guy was killed and didn't need to be, then i support convicting Zimmerman no matter what the kid looked like. But damm....way to shame the public media.
@ mosnana
What laxity are you talking about, it is not easy at all to buy guns. Or um...actually it is very easy for criminals t buy guns because they dont obey the laws. Law abiding citizens must go thru a process , a background check. I love when folks say "lax gun laws"....but offer no examples..lol...even better yet, offer no example as to why or how some new law would stop criminals from getting them.
The rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed....
That's pretty simple. If enough Americans want it changed, they should change the constitution for that. We do have a process to change the constitution, and it's purposely not an easy thing to do. The courts that have been recently ruling in favor of striking down gun laws have got it right, because they are upholding THE CONSTITUTION. If you don't LIKE the constitution, fine. Change it. But do it via the process for changing it, and not by having activist judges interpret it liberally to imply things that just aren't there (such as a so called "right to privacy"). If we really had a "right to privacy", there would be no cameras in stores, intersections, etc. It just doesn't exist (except, of course, to support Roe V Wade, the biggest stretch in SCOTUS history.)
Mary Jones 2.9,
I've been around for a long time now and in the last 10-15 years it does seem to me like there is an effort to have everyone fingerprinted, photographed, and a description recorded. I remember growing up as a school child in the 50's with all the talk on radio, tv, even the movies and in the classroom about all the great evil doer countries and the first thing they wanted to do was disarm the citizens and issue id papers that were mandatory to be carried and submit to being questioned and searched for any reason. It was a sure sign of evil if your own government required you to do these things.
How things change!......and people are 'surprised' that a good majority of the people support the NRA?
Everyone should be required to view the movie "The Nuremberg Trials' as a prerequisite for high school graduation.
Bruce...you guys always seem to like cherry picking. You left out the qualifying part of the amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Your right to bear arms is granted because of the intention of using them in a well regulated militia to defend the State (capital 'S' meaning the Nation). And who's the commander of the militias? Well that would be the President as granted in the U.S. Constitution.
So...are you going to use your arms to defend the Nation upon orders of the President of the United States as clearly stated in the Constitution you so claim to adore? No...didn't think so.
The Maitre...(#2.29)....." "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
It's kinda funny....On the Vines about Supreme Court / ObamaCare when the question was posed about "when has the government ever forced the purchase of a product ?", Those defending ObamaCare went to great pains to point out that in 1790 or something Congress required every able-bodied male to own/purchase a firearm.
And Why might that be.....simple....the people ARE the militia....you can google to your hearts content all the quotes and writings of the Signers as to who they defined the Militia as...I'll not do all your research for you, but you are dead wrong.....Here's one you can start with:
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
I've never bought the idea that you needs guns to secure personal freedom. People in third world countries seem to have an AK-47 under every bed and it hasn't saved them, while people in relatively gun-free Europe enjoy the highest standard of living in the world.
I like how the NRA has craftily pospositioned themselves as "for the second amendment" when really all they are about is selling more guns, so the people they represent could get richer. And I'm sure they lie, cheat, steal if they have to to make sure the money keeps coming in.
I think Obama being black was probably one of the best things for them, so they could play up the fear issue and drive up gun sales.
I'm sure if the NRA had their way, common folks could own all sorts of powerful weapons, including nukes. I'm pretty sure they don't really give a sh!t about the constitution except that there's 1 amendment that they can use to their advantage,
Great comment. I have to agree with it. I'm 52 years old and have never been in a situation where I needed or wanted a gun (including countless trips to NYC and other large cities).
The Maitre...(#2.29)..Just for fun...here's one more for you:
""Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then,that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People."
— Tench Coxe, 1788."
AG99...(#2.31)...." while people in relatively gun-free Europe enjoy the highest standard of living in the world."
Have ya seen Greece lately ??...How about Italy, Spain....They have taken to the streets, their countries are broke....Wait till the shooting starts and see how many Europeans have a gun nobody knows about....
No they dont, there is still violent crime.
@probusiness - the last person I would want "saving me" would be you. Chances are we would both be killed. The very second you produce that weapon, you are no longer a victim. You need to stop watching action movies and come to grip with reality.
Mary, I dare say you are doing something wrong then. I don't seem to have that problem.
To all the "they can pry it out of my cold, dead hands" crowd. You people have completely misunderstood what it is that the gun control lobby is trying to get. They are not trying to take your precious guns away from you. How many times do people have to say this? What the reasonable gun control proponents want is a sure-fire ( pardon the pun) way to ensure guns will not be sold to people who can not own and use them responsibly. This is one thing about which my mayor ( Bloomberg) and I see eye to eye.
Interpreting the second amendment as saying that we need people to be able to own guns because they may need to use them in a militia, does not preclude owning guns for other reasons. There is no reason why a sane non-criminal type can' collect guns. They are interesting. I have a 120 year old Colt navy revolver myself. But seriously, so much more trouble to get a car licensed than it is a gun. And no, you should not be allowed to carry your gun around whereever you go. That's just stupid. This isn't Dodge City.
Alina H., you are right, you are no mathematician, and certainly not a statistician. This is not a vote, it's a poll with a large enough, representative sample size to have a normal range of error. Chances are if it were repeated with another group of randomly selected Americans, the results would be relatively the same. Perhaps it's overstated by the margin of error, but it's not likely wrong. That's statistics.
Hal.....your perspective about things might be determined by your being more like Zimmerman or Martin. Sanford Fl. isn't Dodge City either.
Did you happen to take a look at the poll results? I did and it pretty much confirmed what I suspected.
Mike- When Coxe said that we were still in the midst of a revolution. That is very important to remember. We had declared ourselves to be separate from Britain, but people were still of the mind set of being subject ( albeit unwillingly) of the British Crown. 230 years ago it was very valid to say that a voluntary militia was vital to the defence of a fledgling state.
If today two hundred heavily armed people used their weapons to defend themselves against their government in the way the American colonials did, you would have two hundred heavily armed corpses at the end.
Your point that the government does not have the right to disarm its citizenry is correct, but it can and should deny that privilege to those who cannot demonstrate an ability to own a gun responsibly.
For those that dwell on the notion that Zimmerman was following Trayvon, what is unknown by most is; what exactly did they infer by saying Zimmerman was following martin. Was Zimmerman following 10 feet behind Trayvon or 20 feet behind him? No, what Zimmerman was doing can more accurately be characterized as "observing" Trayvon since he was never anywhere close to Trayvon. This distance away from Trayvon was the reason that Trayvon was able to disappear from Zimmerman's sight and Zimmerman was never close to Trayvon until the moment Trayvon approached him.
Hal-2824511...(#2.37)..."This is one thing about which my mayor ( Bloomberg) and I see eye to eye."
Your Mayor Bloomberg is leading the charge to disarm the American People.....It's interesting to note that this same group of Mayors he has assembled are the same Mayors that have declared their cities Sanctuary Cities....They love illegals, will not join "SafeCommunities".....
I met Mayor Mike on a number of occassions ( at ribbon cutting ceremonies of low-income housing we built) NYPD snipers on the neighboring rooftops, metal detectors for me and my workers to get on the block, Santation Dept practically sterilizes the street that hasn't seen a street sweeper in months, abandoned cars are towed......15 of the shiniest Patrol Cars you ever laid eyes on...and his 5 armored limos when he arrives. He's gets out surrounded by 5 huge bodyguards...He's a tiny man...about 5'3"....
He's entitled to all that security....And he doesn't want me to be able to protect myself and my family ???
F-him...
A criminal, by and large, has no qualms about pulling the trigger. Most people do, however. This can and often does make having the gun fatal to the owner when they pull it out. The first thing in the mind of the attacker is to get the gun. Either you should carefully prepare yourself for the possibility of shooting someone or leave the gun at home. First time buyers should be required to attend a class on safety, including what I have mentioned above. Actually, gun safety and other methods to use when threatened, should be taught in high school. An entire period, all year long, in the senior year, should be devoted to how to survive and excel in the world we live in. Police and experts from every field should present common sense ways to make the most of life. Just knowing how to act during an arrest or traffic stop could save some lives. There are many challenges in life that are not addressed, in their entirety, in every home. The consequences of DUI should definitely be one of those covered in the classes.
Interestingly enough, the 'limits' the article describes that most people have no problem with, restricted sales of automatic weapons, background checks, certain time/place restrictions...have been in effect for years.
Automatic weapons are registered and taxed under the provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934, along with short barreled rifles and shotguns, and many other unusual firearms that are not particularly useful for lawful purposes. An extensive background check is part of having ownership of any of these transferred to you, in addition to a $200 check to the US Treasury Department.
The National Instant Check System has been in place for at least 15 years now, and works fairly well. It would be nice if someone who is not a Federal Firearms License holder could access the system, but even then, it is easy enough, in most cases, to run a background check on someone just by checking public court records to see what kinds of trouble the prospective purchaser in a private sale may have been in. You'll see many things that are not reported in an NICS check, too, such as dismissed cases, traffic violations, civil lawsuits, etc. More information for a seller to possibly decide they don't want their gun becoming property of someone who may be careless or criminal with it.
Anywhere that is private property - homes, businesses, churches, etc., - anyone who enters is really a guest and the owner or custodians of said property always has the right to insist that no weapons are present and to ask people who violate that policy to leave. Anyone who asked to leave but does not or returns without disarming is guilty of trespass and can be charged with such. On the other hand, if a handgun is well concealed, odds are overwhelming that no one will be any the wiser, for what it's worth. The safest place for any handgun is either in a vault or on the body of the person responsible for it. Leaving them in a glove box, in a briefcase or bag, or under the seat of a vehicle while stepping in someplace definitely poses a security risk as cars and their contents definitely do get burglarized and stolen.
And, as always, only authorized government employees and law enforcement officers on official business are allowed to carry weapons on Federal property, and the many signs posted to that effect on the Post Office, the VA facilities, and others remind us all of that.
The TiGor 2.44
Good post but I suspect the article's anti-gun author's reference to automatic weapons was not directed at fully automatic or select-fire weapons. It was, as is usually the case directed at semi-auto weapons, specifically pistols.
Just more misinformation perpetrated by the anti-gun bunch just like their insistence on using the term "assault weapon" for any rifle that looks to them to be intimidating.
For those readers that do not know the correct definition of "assault weapon", the DOD definition is a select fire (semi or full auto) weapon.
@mcb-2773914
Hate to break it to you but you can bet there are people carrying in all of those circumstances now.
As more and more people carry guns gun violence increases. You no limit gun advocates are not the solution, you're the problem.
@Sean-336944
ROTFLMAO!!! Oh really? Well if "all you have to do is look around" then why don't you take a minute to list some of those countries Sean. Be sure to only include countries of a similar size and population with a similar racial and economic diversity. We wouldn't want to compare apples to oranges after all as you've done with the ridiculous examples you've already given.
This is by far my favorite anti-gun argument. I cna't help but laugh at the ridiculousness of it. Here you are claiming everyone who carries a gun is a "danger to society" but then you try to make it sound like the people with guns are the ones with the irrational fears. Dude if you want to know what irrational fear looks like just find a mirror.
I like Maine's state constitution. I'm liberal so it falls right in line with my own belief. Every citizen shall have the right to bear arms and that right shall not be questioned.
It is so easy to take away a persons right to bear arms. Where I live now, even infractions are classified as felonies which in turn takes away a person's right to bear arms and grossly limiting their right to protect their home, property and those they love in public. It doesn't stop there as if they are classified as felons, no person in their home has the right to have a firearm in the home as well or the person convicted can be prosecuted and sent to prison.
I understand taking away the rights of violent crime felons but it doesn't stop there.
Yeah, All people should carry guns at all times. What could possibly go wrong?
@nein nein nein
That's an interseting opinion. Too bad the facts don't support it. But please don't let any pesky facts influence your opinion, how crazy would that be?
http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/welcome.htm
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/firearmnonfataltab.cfm
If you outlaw firearms only Obama will have them, and his New Black Panthers, The Nation of Islam, NAACP, Alquaida, etc.
An armed society is a free society!
NObama in 2012!
i guess i will be the first to die. because i refuse to carry a gun into a public place or have one around my family. i guess i'm just a fool because i believe that to live in a peaceful society you have to be willing to put down your arms, talk and 'turn the other cheek.' it doesn't take any kind of bravery to pick up a gun and shoot someone. any idiot can do it. but it does take a man(woman) to step back from anger and find another way to solve our problems than violence. it's funny that the right is always touting the 'good old days' and we need to get back to that level or morality, but they forget that part of that was respect for law enforcement. we have none of that today. everyone hates the police until you need them and then you get pissed off because they don't do things the way you want them to and decide that they can't handle without your help.
i agree with the 2nd amendment, but as has been said before, it was put in there as a protection from foreign invasion, not so we could become a society of bullies that now feel they can push their weight around because 'i gotta gun.' well, i'm not impressed by your phallic symbol swinging on your hip AND you know, i'm not intimidated by it either. i will defy your bullying. i will defy your attempt to control me under threat of violence. i will not protect myself from your vigilantism. so, i guess if i meet any of you and i piss you off enough, because i would, you will have to kill me. i will never bend to your will. so, kill me. my troubles will be over. yours, on the other hand, will just be beginning, because law or no laws you'll have to prove that i was an imminent threat.
i hope all of you gun toting machos out there are atheists, because it would make me feel just this much better to know that, rather than see that you are hate mongerers AND hypocrits. why would anyone want to take a gun into a house of worship where our Lord, Jesus Christ implored us to live in peace, with brotherhood and compassion for one another? i know, someday a criminal might acost me and you're saying, 'then you'll be sorry.' oh, ye of little faith. i can't live my life being afraid of what might be around every corner and if something evil might befall me one day, well, so be it. like i said, my troubles will be over.
i think you all need to open your eyes, just a little. one gentleman said that the truth is the nra is just trying to make a profit and if they have to scare us to death to do that, they will. they couldn't care less about the constitution or your rights. they care about their profits. but, that isn't your motivation, is it? you need to feel superior to everyone around you. you need to be the man on top looking down and the only way to feed your ego is to have a gun and make sure everyone knows it. well, look at you! i guess we should all be awed....i'm not. it makes me sad when a whole society embraces violence and hatred.
It is the RIGHT of every American to practice the freedoms they hold dear. Being in the military, I know that a "militia" is not a state or federal government run group nor are they people employed directly by said governments. The militia is "NOT" the National Guard, that is just a false Liberal idea. In the time of the writing of the Constitution, you must recall the difference in our language from then to now, the words have the same meanings yet to some they don't because they do not suit your lifestyle. I had the pleasure of being stationed in Germany for 4 years, they have the right and do own guns and they are proud of it. It helps to live in and interact in a place you talk about so that you can get the real facts and not what basement dwellers tend to make up. I am Pro- Constitution, Pro-Freedom, Pro-Gun, and Pro-Eviction to those that want to change my country. If you don't like then get the hell out!
@alessa
You're not a fool Alessa. You're just narrow-minded and easily conned into believing ridiculous stereotypes. But hey, nobodies perfect right?
It is obvious Alessa has never been the victim of a crime. I find those who hold her view seldom have been. From personal experience I can tell you that after a criminal beats you bloody and you "turn the other cheek", he will beat THAT one bloody, too. Tell me, Alessa, how many times would you allow yourself to be raped before you'd stop "turning the other cheek"? Once? Twice? Five times? Or maybe you should just take the "reasonable" approach and pray more!! Oh, that's right. You'll complain to the cops--who HAVE the GUNS!!! How naive.
I'm pretty apathetic about gun ownership, but I've never felt a need to carry a weapon anywhere because I stay alert and aware of my surroundings. I do think that laws like "Stand your Ground" need to be stricken or otherwise changed to keep idiots from turning into Dirty Harry wannabes.
lolfattynerdswhoknew...(#2.57)...Do you even know what Stand Your Ground means ???
In Florida it Replaced the "Duty to Retreat" language ...I'll post a link at the end.....It was enacted in 2005. How many times before last week had you even heard the term.....Stand Your Ground is not a problem. Anti-gun nuts, Mayor Bloomberg leading the charge, have seized on this incident to go after SYG.
"The new law codified in Florida Statutes 776.013(3)(2006) states:
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
This new law expands upon Florida's preexisting castle doctrine and permits one to stand their ground anywhere. Florida Statutes 776.032(1) then holds in pertinent part:
A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force..."
http://www.hessingerlaw.com/Articles/Self-Defense-and-Floridas-Stand-Your-Ground-Law.aspx
Hal-2824511...(#2.40)..."If today two hundred heavily armed people used their weapons to defend themselves against their government in the way the American colonials did, you would have two hundred heavily armed corpses at the end."
I had to respond to your comment.....Who would be doing this killing ??...The U.S. Military ??....Another Waco,TX..???....We are at a critical time in our history....just look to Rome.....It went from a Republic, to a Democracy...This is the stage we are almost at now......Next came Caesar crossing the Rubicon with a Standing Army....And Rome fell into a Dictatorship before ending up in the ash pile of history...
If any U.S. President decided to try to have a Rubicon Moment and use US Troops on US Citizens....do you think the Military would follow that Order ??
If what you wrote happened...200 dead by the hand of the Government, the difference here is that Rome didn't have 100 Million Armed citizens....Do you think Americans would just lay down their arms ??
An Armed man is a Citizen
An Unarmed man is a Subject
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
~ Thomas Jefferson
alessa...You seem like a nice, peaceful person. I hate to tell you, many times simply walking away is not an option. If you don't want to handle a firearm, you should hope that someone on your side does, in the event of a violent attack. Do a search for these names if you think you can always walk away; Omar Sharif Cash; Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian; Bob and Nancy Strait. There are many more examples, but the point is most folks are like you and me. We just want to live in peace and be happy. The truth is there are thugs, animals, psychopaths and predators walking around who prey on unsuspecting, unprepared people. If you are prepared to take your chances on never running into someone like that, you can. But don't take away my ability to protect me and mine. I am prepared to defend myself and my family without regret, without hesitation and with the attitude needed to prevail. But you have nothing to fear from me. I am a law abiding person. I always handle firearms a safely as possible. I'm not macho or reckless or a tough guy. I just refuse to be a victim and one day, someone like me may save your life or prevent you from being raped.
ProBus---about other countries attacking us---wasn't that the reason Japan, in WW2, decided not to invade the U.S. mainland? Because they knew that many American households had at least 1 firearm?
johnnyt, I like the 'Nuremburg Trials' idea. People forget. And how about documentary films showing what the Allied soldiers found when they liberated the concentration camps? I remember those being shown in history class, back when I was in high school.
Sean-336944, come on now. Address the issues, not the users. You are suspended for a week for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
Please site your source, because from what I read gun violence in the US is highest in places where so-called gun control is the toughest (DC and Chicago, for example) and lowest in places where guns are commonplace (Texas, Alaska, etc.).
I know I would feel much safer walking into a convenience store in the middle of the night in Texas knowing that several people in there may be lawfully carrying concealed weapons for their own protection because, believe you me, the bad guys also know it! Only a suicidal fool would walk into a public place in Texas and start shooting people, whereas in DC or Chicago, they'd be pretty sure they are the only armed one in the place.
Heres my view. I have a concealed carry license, I own a few rifles and 2 handguns. Just because I feel threatened I am not going to shoot, If I can get away I will take that road first, if I can't get away from the person(s) who are messing with me, then I will do what I have to do to protect myself. I never want to kill or ever even point a gun at somebody. But I do believe in protecting myself. And I will protect my family at all cost. If someone breaks into my home, is trying to bust into my home... I won't have mercy on whoever it is. Little kids usually know right from wrong, I won't ever believe an adult didn't know.
Caveman! How many of those guns can you shoot at once???
The rifles are only used for target practice, don't go jumpin ship just yet. And I have 2 handguns, 1 I carry and the other that has been locked up for 17 years, it belonged to my father, it was the gun he carried as a police officer. Get a grip on yourself.
MCB...quit trolling...douche.
Besides, when someone is going to commit a crime or take a life with a firearm, they are not checking the local gun laws before doing so.
I cant be the only LIB on here that owns firearms....or maybe I am :/
MCB...quit trolling...douche.>>>
I seem to have struck a nerve.
No American socialite, your note the only one...
I think that people who are against ALL guns are few and far between. I have heard very few people ever speak out against hunting weapons, target weapons, or shotguns and rifles for home protection ( handguns are horrible tools for home protection, most are unable to hit anything with a handgun.) The sound of a round being pumped into a shotgun is probably the best home protection available. Concealable weapons probably cause far more accidents and problems than they prevent crimes. I have very little faith in the ability of those with a cowboy mentality to protect themselves or anyone else in the event of a criminal incident. My issue with the NRA is that they are not an organization of shooters, they are a political organization that feels that they must oppose any and all gun regulation, and the NRA will fight to defend assault weapons, gun sales with no background checks, unlimited gun sales, lack of a waiting period, armor piercing ammo, etc. Guns are fine and a part of the American culture, but there has to be reasonable control and limits. The guns we have today did not exist in the days that the Constitution was written and the damage they can do was never anticipated. A 30 pound 5 foot long musket that took 3 minutes to reload, was not very accurate and cost more than most made in a year cannot be compared with the automatic and semi automatic weapons of today. The world has changed, some reasonable restraint is needed. Guns are not a religion ( at least to most reasonable people.)
Sean, I can tell you where you can get a gun, with no background check. My former next-door neighbors had a garage sale out in their front yard, with a large sign that read, "GUNS FOR SALE."
You sound like a responsible and inteligent person and I agree with much of what you said, HOWEVER, The way the I.R.A. has been promoting and lobbying for laws which allow gun owners and gun carriers to use these guns to kill people without question, shows how irresponsible and callous they are.
Most people who have guns have never been trained as to how and when to use them and seldom practice with them. Many of them have emotional or psychological problems or simply a bad hair day and yet they can kill another person with impunity by simply stating that they felt threatened.
If you wish to have a gun and use it then you must take the responsibility for that action and it must be investigated. NO EXCEPTIONS!!!!!!!
The dishonesty and pejorative propaganda against guns has reached a new low. Guns are not a problem, they are a self defense and protective solution.
This article is really about the upper twenty five percent of society who are living good, using ridicule and scare tactics to alarm people unnecessarily about our second amendment rights, which actually secure democracy and all our other rights. Guns are a self-defense equalizer. And in a screwy violent world where crime is glorified and a subculture of criminality is shared via rap music and other misogynist, destructive, and ultimately violence-inducing "street" style, we need to begin to look at the sources for violence in our culture. And gunsa re not the problem.
The problem is that our society is becoming a desperate unforgiving socially darwinistic breeding ground for winners who are oligarchs and share allegiance to no country but the filthy rich, and the rest of us working poor who are experiencing many dangers from people poorer than us.
We are creating a society dependent upon vice and black market crime with all its attendent violence , and it IS ubiquitous. we have so many corupt law enforcement that we are sometimes in danger from those we call for help or whom we look to to be sane sound arbiters of a dangerous situation,
Like all the rest of the folks who founded our society, we NEED to protect our gun rights AND all our rights to self-defense and to PROTECTIVE safety for ourselves and YES! our property!!
those of us who are losers in a society where the top 25% (NOT 1%) are winners, have to struggle constantly financially...and the rich and comfy have asserted a monopoly on the majority of social goods. Affording food and recreation, decent shelter and raising a family of some sort..all beyond the reach of far too many of us.
release the pressures, that prevent most of us from earning a living wage and achieving respect and dignity in this society and eradicate our alternative economic engine for people who have no work, allow guns to be carried and to be purchased by any citizen who wants one except for those who are mentally decompensated, and stop enculturating social exploitation and passing brutality like a virus through families where no help to heal has ever been received, and violence will desist.
Love the ignore author feature, no more sissy stuff from sean on my screen..
"I have a concealed carry license,"
Why conceal your gun? We see Brinks trucks all the time. Everybody knows they have money in them. Nobody messes with them because they know the people in them are armed. If you are so scared that you feel the need to carry a guy, why hide it? Why conceal it? Like the Brinks trucks -- let everyone know you are armed. Do you honestly think a criminal will think -- oh man -- before Imess with that guy I'd better get more guns because he armed?
@MM and others.... What you fail to realize is there are many sane, law abiding people carrying concealed weapons (where they are allowed) all of the time. But it is a very rare occasion when these people actually draw their weapon... unless they feel their life is at risk. Many times during a bank robbery, store robbery or some other criminal act, one or more victims/customers/bystanders have been carrying a concealed weapon but they didn't attempt to use them. They are not predisposed to shoot someone for stealing property or other such actions. Consider this..... When congress person Gabby Giffords was shot in the head (and 6 other people were killed and 13 were wounded) in Tuscon, by that lunatic Jared Loughner, there were no fewer than 5 citizens in the crowd carrying guns. Not one of them even unholstered their weapon. Everyone of them said that they realized that to do so would make a bad situation even worse. See it is not the citizens who have concealed carry permits you should worry about. Because 90+% of them are rational, sane and intelligent people. The ones you have to worry about are the ones you would still have to worry about even if all gun ownership was made illegal. Remember... If you outlaw guns... only outlaws will have guns.... and... When seconds count... the police are only minutes away.
American Socialist - you are not the only one. I probably have more firearms than most of these John Wayne wannabees. Some are priceless antiques, others I inherited from my late father and are defo priceless to me. The others I purchased legally at gun shops or gun shows. I love firearms for their unique beauty and craftmanship. The last thing on my mind is using them on my fellow citizens.
Sean - criminals can get what they want by simply stealing it. Hand guns are coveted items in house break-ins
Charlie-1915998...(#3.14)..."Why conceal your gun? "
Here's why.....Because if you are showing your weapon, all you're asking for is to be shot in the back of the head from behind, then they will rob you of your wallet AND your gun.....Personally, I think anyone that is carrying concealed and is wearing some dopey " Do ya feel lucky punk, do ya " T-shirt or even a NRA ballcap is just advertising and defeating the whole purpose of carry concealed....
Most times the BRINKS guys are gunned down at the beginning of the armored car heist.
@Sean-336944
Nobody wants to listen to whiny little spoiled brats throwing a tantrum and crying like babies either but you'd hardly make the assumption that people are "afraid of what they have to say".
@Charlie-1915998
Personally, because I don't want to freak out oversensitive types such as yourself. Some ignorant and irrationally fearful people actually believe I am some sort of threat because I'm armed. I'm not an a-hole so I have no desire to provoke or "threaten" the simple-minded.
So Tex and Back, How many bad guys have you had to shoot? How many times have you had to point your gun at somebody? Do either of you guys expect to have to do this? Do either of you guys ever leave the house without a gun? Do either of you guys ever go swimming? Do either of you guys want to be buried with your gun(s)? I know you think I am screwing with you, but I really am curious.
@wireman-1399628
0, 0, no, yes, no, no
Since you're curious I'll say that the majority of the time I carry is when I'm hiking alone in the backcountry. I don't have to worry about mountain lions because I am carrying a firemarm, I don't have to worry about offending other hikers because it's concealed.
Aside from that, seatbelts are uncomfortable and I hate to wear them so why should I? Most of the time I'm driving around town and a seat belt isn't going to save my life in a low speed collision. Every major accidents I've been in (3 roll-overs in my younger days) I survived without serious injury and without wearing a seatbelt. Since I'm likely to never actually need one do you think it is silly for me to wear one?
Wireman - Just assuming you are being serious. I have never had to shoot or point my gun at anybody, nor do I ever want to. I don't expect to EVER have to, but I will if it means keeping me safe from harm. I always take my gun with me 90% of the time, It's a small gun which I can comfortably wear without much thought. The gun I carry which I know nobody cares, is a Ruger SR9c, I do go swimming, I love swimming ( What's that got to do with anything? ). Buried with my guns? I feel with that question you are in a way implying we are over the top gun nuts who would not know what to do with out our guns?. I came into the world with nothing and thats the way I will go out. Other than these comments, I never talk about my guns, I don't dream about my guns, I don't brag about having a gun, I don't think I am rambo just waiting to shoot something. Target shooting is fun, but thats all I ever want or hope to point my gun at.
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929-1953, about 20 million dissidents unable to defend themselves were rounded up & exterminated.
In 1911 Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917 1.5 million Armenians unable to defend themselves were rounded up & exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939-1945 a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948-1952 20 million political dissidents were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964-1981 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971-1979 300,000 Christians were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975-1977 1 million educated people were rounded up and exterminated.
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th century because of gun control: 56,000,000
Guns in the hands of honest citizens saves lives and property & yes gun control laws adversely affect only law-abiding citizens.
We do have an inate and unalienable right to self defense via the "right to bear arms". The original intent of the 2nd amendment was not to have guns for hunting. It was to prevent any government or person from forcefully infringing on our God given rights.
Tex You need to move. That is the best advice you will ever get in your life.
Back You actually have a good reason to carry a gun. You carry when it is appropriate. I assume you do not carry when you go to public events. Or to the bank, DMV or to work.
I am not against gun ownership by responsible Americans. I am not against all cc laws. I am rightfully afraid of most people carrying weapons most of the time. Let's face it, if you need to take your gun to church, there is either something wrong with your church, or, there is something wrong with you.
@ (#3.24)......Oddly enough, add to that , Bill Ayers ( Obama said "just some guy that lived on the same block" ), when he was head of the Weathermen and Weather Underground, estimated that 25 Million Capitalists would have to be killed after the Revolution....
"Just a Little Genocide "I asked, "well what is going to happen to those people we can't reeducate, that are diehard capitalists?" and the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated. And when I pursued this further, they estimated they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these reeducation centers.
And when I say "eliminate," I mean "kill."
This was the testimony of FBI informant Larry Grathwohl in the 1982 documentary No Place to Hide.
The 25 people plotting the extermination of the 25 million Americans who would bitterly cling to the American way of life?"
http://forum.hucksarmy.com/viewtopic.php?f=141&t=16704
Ayers recently said he wakes up every day hoping that this is the day he ends capitalism.
Want to read Ayers WeatherUnderground Handbook ???
http://www.zombietime.com/prairie_fire/
Lol I need to move? WHY would I ever want to move away from my home? I moved to WV for over a year, I like where I am just fine. You may look at me as dangerous... But I am no more dangerous then you are. I am not a criminal. I work hard, I am a very responsible person & I stand by my beliefs. There is nothing wrong with me carrying everyday I leave my house if I choose to, compared to someone who does so only now and then. You can try your best to twist it and make me look like I'm scared of something, like I have to fear something. Many people try to turn it around to where if someone carries a gun, it's because they are scared of something or someone. With my gun I am not afraid of others doing harm to me or my family. If you wish to call me a coward for such things then by all mean do so if it makes you feel better in your argument.
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence.
Charles Austin Beard, historian
"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically 'right.' Guns ended that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. Wear a gun to someone else's house, you're saying, 'I'll defend this home as if it were my own.' When your guests see you carry a weapon, you're telling them, 'I'll defend you as if you were my own family.' And anyone who objects levels the deadliest insult possible: 'I don't trust you unless you're rendered harmless'!" - L. Neil Smith, The Probability Broach
Tex If you live in an area half as safe as the one I live in , then there is no twisting anything. You are afraid of everybody. Don't worry about what I say, ask your doctor if he thinks you have any problems. You can do this in total confidentiality. No shame in asking. No shame in getting help. You are not alone.
Most times the BRINKS guys are gunned down at the beginning of the armored car heist.
BS!! When was the last time that happened -- if ever.
"Because if you are showing your weapon, all you're asking for is to be shot in the back of the head from behind, then they will rob you of your wallet AND your gun.."
So Mike -- how long have you had this fear of EVERYTHING??
Like I said twist it to your benefit. Go ahead and make me this mental case who is scared of everything and everyone. If you enjoy be an un-armed person, an easy target for any criminal looking for that poor sap, then that is your right and choice. Going un-armed makes you no more afraid or un-afraid than it does me. It just means I am prepared IF god forbid something happens.
" When seconds count the police are only minutes away. "
Tex Calm down. Just ask YOUR doctor if he thinks you should be carrying around a lethal weapon at all times.
If you do not trust him. ask your Pastor or Priest.
I was a police officer for 28 years and I know that if a person is relying on the police to protect them they are without protection. The police will, in most cases, respond and investigate after the crime occurs but will seldom get there in time to prevent it.
In the real world you are responsible for your own safety. Thankfully, most will never be a victim of violent crime but you never know. You can take your chances or try to be prepared. I'm not a Rambo wanna-be but I will not be a victim if I can help it. I do not understand why some people here abuse those that choose to be responsible for the protection of themselves and their families. To me that seems like the intelligent thing to do.
@wireman-1399628
You must be speaking from experience. Did it work for you? Did your doctor give you a pill to solve your problem of being "rightfully afraid of most people carrying weapons most of the time"? You anti-gun nuts (yes you are, and if you doubt it see a shrink about that issue too) make me laugh my ass off with your ridiculous assertion that it is the people carrying that have an irrational fear even as you ADMIT that YOU are the fearful one. Why on Earth would you be afraid of a law abiding, honest citizen just because they have a gun? Do you cower when you see police officers also, they have guns? Do you avoid National Parks for fear of Park Rangers, some of them have guns? Do you lock yourself in your home during local hunting seasons, guns all over the place during those times of the year?
It's actually pretty common for people who are in denial about their own mental issues to try and turn it around and claim it is everyone else who actually has the problem. Please stop back and let us know what steps your doctor plans to remedy you of your irrational fears.
Back You are also afraid of everybody. Get help before you hurt somebody. A gun is not a safe security blanket. I know several cops. Not wanna be security guards. None of them, not one think ordinary citizens should carry weapons at all times. They go out of their way to tell me this. One of them gets very agitated when asked about cc laws. He has seen something, but I am not going to ask him what it was.
When I see a police officer or some other trained official. I know he/she has been trained and vetted.
Sometimes a wannabe cop kills somebody. Unless you live in a cave you have heard about this.
Back Get the help you need before you hurt somebody. You have anger issues and probably should not even own a gun even if you leave it at home. Don't be afraid of your doctor, he won't lock you up unless you threaten him. Good luck to you
Remember, nobody means you any harm.
It should be called the national gun nut association. The nra can spin their lies about second amendment rights all day long; but what this is really about is warmongering and hate mongering for profit. Really....the nra has turned our country into a war zone. C'mon man, NOBODY needs a houseful of automatic weapons in a civilized society.
I guess that means you think we live in some kind of civilized society. I can't say I see a whole lot of civilized behaviour on the average comment thread. More often than not the discussion turns quickly to bitter partisanship bickering. For some reason, even after all these years together on this rock, we still can't quite get along.
truthhurts...
the TRUTH is there are VERY few households with automatic weapons. Of course in Switzerland it's different, every home has an automatic weapon, supplied by the government.
Americans that have automatic weapons have undergone an extensive and intensive federal background investigation and have paid extremely high license fees for the licenses required.
truthhurts-2443155...
Have you ever fired an automatic weapon...its pretty fun :)
Theres all types of hobbies, people collect old coins, some people collect cars...and yes...some people collect firearms.
I also think the NRA is full of nuts and paranoia freaks. However, with the Christian Taliban taking over the country and spreading hate, as a gay person with a family who loves to camp I've been considering getting a gun to protect my family. Gays are being attacked more frequently...fueled by the Christian right. If this is the only way to keep my wife from being attacked, then this is the only way.
XD- The weird thing is that even though every Swiss household has a firearm, Switzerland has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. At the age of 18, every Swiss male is drafted into the militia, so they know how to responsibly treat a gun. I agree with everything you are saying.
Yes, and most Americans probably know how to spell "American" - please check your headline!
I doubt most of the posters will even notice....they'll be too eager to type out their usual nonsense about how cars, rocks, frozen peas, and sling shots can kill just as often, easily, and quickly as a gun can.
mcb... and that's different than your rhetorical vitriol how?
We're proponents of our Constitutional rights, and you're a proponent of quashing those rights.
XD - It's pointless too argue with people in this frame of mind. Their heads so far up their ass, you will never get them to see past their own views. To them an inanimate object is to be feared more than the person who wants to murder someone, they believe getting rid of guns, or making it VERY VERY hard to get one, will deter a person who is set on murdering. To them it isn't people who we should be afraid of, it's Guns, knives and everything else, mostly guns though because that's what they get off on bitching about. To them a responsible gun owner is a person who just hasn't murdered yet.
To them a man who has owned guns all his life, never shot anybody, never aimed it at anybody, is still on the same level to a degree as a man with bad intentions and a gun in his hand. People stab people everyday ( I know MCB I know, you were counting on this ) yet nobody gets their panties in a bunch to ban knives.
Drunk drivers kill people everyday, nobody hollers for a ban on cars... why? Because when it's a gun related issue, it is the GUN that is to be feared, GUNS kill people ( not the people behind the gun )... But when it's a Drinking and driving incident, it's the drivers fault for being careless.. When someone stabs somebody it is the guy stabbing who is at fault, not the knife. Tell me why? You blame an inanimate object for shooting somebody, but you don't blame the car when it drives into another vehicle, you don't blame the knife for stabbing somebody... Why is it always the GUNS fault but never the person behind the gun?.
@TexasLaw You're right. It is the fault of the person behind the gun. And I've met plenty of people I wouldn't trust within a mile of a gun who currently have the right to do whatever the hell they want with one.
I'm not worried about you. I know plenty of responsible gun owners. Grew up with them. I'm worried about the generally law abiding guy who just got laid off, had to file for bankruptcy, and then got dumped by his wife. At Cracker Barrel. Oh wait. That just happened.
In the olden days he would have just thrown a hissy fit, maybe knocked some silverware off the table, and had the cops called on him by the hostess. But since he had his gun handy...
I know TL... I just enjoy crawling under mcb's skin.. he can never logically defend his position.
And I carry two. Both 9mm. The one in the small of the back is the Springfield Armory XDm and the prime is a Ruger LC9 in an IWB at about the 4:00 position, with a slight forward cant.
The wife carries a nice S&W Model 60 (small J frame) in 357mag. (She uses 38 at the range).
Son carries multiple as I do, and his wife also carries, but I'm not sure what.
The really amazing thing that the anti-gun people can't quite grasp is that if they see any of us out on the street, or in a store, they'll never know we're armed. We go about our business quietly as do most people. I hold the hand of my grandson or granddaughter if we're together. The only difference between us and other people is we're very aware of our surroundings. We ensure our safety that way, and we ensure the security of our firearms by being aware.
Have a great day sir and enjoy the weekend!!
And I have said it on other post. It's not the guns that are the problem. It's the fact that people now days hold grudges, they get mad and instantly do or dream about taking revenge on someone who has upset them. People are cry babies. Just like fighting, in the old days, you got in a fight and 80% of the time you were friends or atleast talked a few days afterwards. You get into a fight now days, you have to worry about the person going and getting 15 of their friends coming back and acting like they are the hulk, OR you have to worry about them leaving, being highly pissed that you beat them, and coming back and killing you. People can't deal with ANYTHING anymore. Once they are mad, it really never goes away. It builds and builds and then thats how alot of these news stories come to be.
Relatively few Americans own hand guns. Fewer still want to carry them in pubilc. We will never be a society of citizens walking around with guns.
Would be nice if the same procedure was applied to hand guns.
Drunk drivers kill people everyday, nobody hollers for a ban on cars... why?>>>
Because cars weren't designed to kill. Guns were.
davey - not too long ago we were a society of citizens that walked around carrying guns. Most people had a rifle in the scabbard on their horse and a revolver on their hip. There was a lot less crime and people got hung in public for murder. You know what, it worked pretty good until some liberal got all upset about the rights of the poor criminal.
TexasLaw- I agree. Whatever happened to the good old days? When a person got into a fight, they used their fists, not a baseball bat or thug club. Most people were responsible with their guns. At least my sons school still has a rifle team.
Keep going mcb, you're almost there.....
As the poster said, a gun is an inanimate object...how can a gun sitting uncocked in its holster kill you?
You've almost got it! I'm rooting for you!
It had to be cocked and ready to fire with the safety off. Same as the one the elementary school kid dropped from his backpack in the school cafeteria and shot that little girl (oooh, missed that one with Google, didn't you?). I can drop my gun all day long and it won't fire unless it's cocked and the safety is off. Learn how a gun works, Sean, if you want to talk about them.
TexasLaw:
Because you can't put a car into a school backpack or in a trench coat and carry it into a school. Because if you drop a knife, it will hit the floor and stay there; there's almost zilch chance that the blade will fly off and stick in someone. Because if you point a knife at someone, they can often get out of your way. And if you stick a knife in someone, then you don't have five or more other blades that you can stick in five or more other people in less than a minute.
Sleeps with bear. I just read your post about "guns at church" do you realise how easy a make it is for a criminal to rob a church? my parents say there are at least three gun carrying men in their church. Wont take long for ppl to figure out that their church is not the place to make an easy buck, but if you attend a church that doesnt protect its people, its just a matter of time before you are hit.
You do seem to have a serious problem with this Sean. It shows when you change the subject to try to make your point stick. A person who knows how to handle a gun (knows how it works) does not "accidentally" cock a gun. And if the safety is on (oooh, you forgot that safety didn't you?) the gun cannot BE "accidentally" cocked. The example that you tried to use concerning the shoplifter was that of a criminal intending to have the gun ready to use in a crime. I'm not a criminal, but I don't believe they go into a crime with the safety on. As to MY point, the SAFE gun doesn't kill anybody, the UNSAFE person with the gun is who kills.
And yes, I know what a bullet does, moron. I took one in my right thigh years ago. Have no idea what that has to do with what I was discussing, but it was a diversion I guess.
"Don't tell me a gun can't be accidentally cocked - it happens all the time, and you're playing a semantics game."
Now I KNOW you don't know how guns work. The ONLY way a gun can be accidentally cocked is by someone who doesn't know how guns work, like you or that kid in the school cafeteria. That's UNSAFE people handling the gun, not the gun accidentally cocking itself.
I don't own any guns anymore, and the fact that you refer to them as toys tells me you shouldn't either!
And thanks, but don't feel sorry for that gun wound. It was a gunfight (when I WAS stupid) and I shot the other guy first. (He started it, but he missed the first two shots, and I didn't. Then he got me with his third after I hit him.) That was my mistake, and yes I did learn a thing or two. And yes, now I'm trained. But I was also trained to kill with my hands, just as quick and efficiently as with a gun. Think about that for a moment. I have to get close enough to touch you in order to kill you. If you had a gun, you could stop me before I could get close enough. But you don't have one so nighty-night...you're dead, sweetheart.
Speaking of nighty-night, I have a busy day tomorrow, so I have to go now. I'm talking to the wall anyway, so nothing lost here.
Why should anyone be surprised there is support for the NRA? They promote responsible ownership and use of firearms. They offer training and support to that end. Maybe those fearful anti-gun types who feel compelled to crawl out from under their bed to disparage those of us supporting gun ownership should cease with the hyperbole. If they did maybe they'd be able to sleep on top of their beds! There will always be irresponsible people in his world. I can't cite any instances of wild-eyed NRA members using their guns to rape, rob or just blow away people for the shear joy of watching blood and body parts splatter. I can cite at least one instance of a federal government (ATF) agency providing guns to Mexican narco-terrorists (Fast & Furious), with deadly results to at least one border agent. I could cite instances of police shooting innocent people and engaging in crime. I can turn on the tv tonight to hear the latest instances of murder, robbery, etc. all commited by CRIMINALS carrying guns. Despite hysterical rants to the contrary, most legal gun owners will only discharge their firearms in recreational pursuits if at all. I applaud the NRA for promoting resononsible pursuit of those recreational uses and for defending our right to pursue them.
Basd on what I've read, they do more than that.
sean, its a shame you have no clue how guns operate , your arguments are weak just like your mind a gun does not kill it is the person with the gun that kills . your statement about the robber droping his gun and it went off , dummy he dropped the gun it had a human involved in its discharge . it is called un cocked not reset you dumb ass
Gun hoarders
It's a mental condition.
Yes , call me gun crazy ! I pledge to never be out guned
That was an intentional misspell, right? If not, you don't have to worry about being outgooned.
It is rather convenient how much the gun lobby has profited from the panic they've fabricated. It's practically free money.
Do you think Sarah Brady, HCI and other gun control groups don't profit ? Do you think they spend all those donations to the cause on actual gun control ???
Hehe, pray tell, how much money do you think the gun industry makes? Go on, take a wild guess.
Well, for starters, 2011 set a record for background checks with 14.5 million requested.
That number is directly related to the fear mongering campaign put into play by the NRA telling people that Obama was going to eliminate the 2nd amendment.
While I can not find current data for dollars spent on firearms in 2011, the 14.5 million requests is quite a bit higher than 2005 when total estimated dollars spent on firearm purchases was 2.1 billion.
Note that this doesn't take into account all the illegal gun sales or any accessories such as holsters, extra clips, targeting devices and other various ancillary firearm items.
So yeah, basically they're @!$%#ting money.
Quit complaining about gun sales! Its probably the only economic stimulus Obama can honestly take credit for! How ironic.
At the cost of American lives. That's why I'm complaining.
@Toasty McGrath
Sort of like how the anti-gun lobby has profited from the panic they've fabricated over the Zimmerman case huh?
Care to cite the specific amount of money there, kiddo? Yeah, I didn't think so...
I hate to bring to Rueters/lpsos attention the minor fact that there already ARE extensive laws and regulations regarding the acquisition and ownership of automatic weapons in the United States.
Here's a little primer for the uninformed:
Amercians? come on MSNBC, can't you do better than this? peace
No, they can't...they had to try to beat out CNN and Fox, getting it up onto the site. The results of the poll may be wrong, too, but at least it's up there.
What about my right to go to a public place, mind my own business, and not have to worry about some guy-- who happens to be having a bad day--coming near me and my family with a concealed weapon? How about freedom from guns? When did we all agree to give up that right and freedom?
I was told that our rights to be free of gun nuts have been totally negated.
Sleepswithbear,
That right was given up the moment the 2nd amendment was ratified.
I hate to tell you this SWB but someone whose going to go on a killing rampage won't be worried about having a CCWL or not. Like a gangbanger they'll be carrying regardless, it's only law abiding citizens who go through the rigamarole to get a CCW in the first place.
Also any business or office can post a sign that bans concealed weapons unless the person is a police officer. Of course it's also MY right to not do business with those establishments if I so choose also. I have turned away from more than one fast food restaurant and went elsewhere after seeing such a sign. It is however their right to post it and I'll abide by their choice and YOU can choose to frequent those businesses if you wish.
What about our right to be free from your paranoid dillusions ? If you are so scared stay home.
When did we give up the right to abide by the constitution just because your some kind of liberal nut case gunaphobe?
Those same so called gun nuts will be the same ones who save your worthless A$$ from a real nut job who is trying to rob you or your family.
Better yet, Why don't you go back to your messed up liberal attitude and go pound sand.
As you said, COMPLETE sentences... there is a second part to that sentence:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"
And this from Thomas Jefferson... you know, that guy that basically wrote the 2nd Amendment:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one."
Sean-336944 - The problem is that people like yourself are taught that a Militia is a standing army, it is not. A Militia is a bunch of neighbors that gather together in an emergency.
A good example is when there is a flood and neighbors gather together to fill and place sandbags, or when there is a forest fire and they gather to protect their neighborhood with shovels and hoses and my favorite, the neighborhood watch!
Simply put, "we the people" are the Militia, including you, who chooses to be non-functional or non-participating by being unarmed. I know you wont want to believe me, so please look it up. Most will say something about amateur unpaid citizen soldiers.
"Well Regulated" in Proper English means to have Enough.
Sean: It is pretty well established in writings from the founders that "well-regulated militia" simply meant "well-armed citizens". The meanings of those words at the time they were written has been pretty well established by scholars.
The sentence also says "being necessary to the security of a free state"... Since I am so bad at reading comprehension as you suggested, you will have to point out for me the part of the 2nd Amendment that says "until the government no longer feels it's necessary"
SLB - Do you sleep with bears in the woods or do they visit you at your home? What would you do if a bear, wolf, mountain lion or rabid animal wanted to eat you, your family or one of your pets? Then there are the are the armed two legged animals that tend to visit people in ther beds uninvited. Which end of the gun would you like to be on?
I hear from 2nd Amendment advocates that the problem is there are already more than enough regulations on the books but that they are not being enforced.
My question is if that is true, why is that the case? Obviously it is not anti-gun people blocking their implementation.
Can anyone from the gun rights camp offer an explanation or reasonable rationalization for that position?
Good evening culheath...
Actually, there was a case back in the mid to late 70's(?) I believe. It was in NY and a Legal Aide Defense lawyer successfully fought an illegal possession firearm charge against a murderer/rapist.
His thought process, although to me convoluted, is if you examine it, logical.
He noted that YES it is illegal for a felon to possess a firearm. But that was not the "official" charge.
He fought the charge on the basis that his client WAS A KNOWN FELON.
The STATE cannot ask a known felon to register or license a firearm as it is illegal for them to possess one.
Having a known felon register and license his firearms is asking him to self incriminate himself in contradiction to the Constitutional right against self incrimination.
The judge agreed and tossed the charges.
Exactly, what regulations are you referring to? And, in what State?
Your question is far too vague to begin to provide an answer.
Hello again, XD,
I agree with your assessment that the logic, such as is, is convoluted.
In that situation it seems to me that what we have is the clashing of two principles: 1) A constitutionally based right and 2) a state law meant uphold public safety.
Obviously the judge felt that the constitutional right superseded the public safety issue.
Fair enough as an example.
Do you think that sort of clashing of legal interests is the most common bar to gun ownership regulations being implemented?
Pardon the vague nature of my question, but the reason I raised it is because I have heard it as an equally vague response to the challenge that we need more ownership and acquisition regulations than we have at present. Anti-gun people frequently assert that acquiring a gun is too easy and that serves to put guns into the hands of people who should not have them.
I wasn't thinking of any particular state and was looking at it more from a federal level.
To a point yes. It IS a constitutional right to own firearms, and the Constitution does not limit what a citizen can own. Although with general consensus and no major fight against it, certain weapons have been declared illegal, rocket launchers and nukes for instance. They're deemed weapons of mass destruction.
People bring up the "assault weapons" ban and a desire to re-implement it. I always ask people to define "assault weapon". Per the previous regulation, my wifes Ruger 10/22 could be considered an assault weapon. My AR-15 and Mini-14 definitely fell into the ban. Why because they were semi automatic and could use "large" capacity magazines.
But, the problem is actually ignorance on the part of many people. They equate "assault weapons" with the military versions of the M-16A2 or AK-47, or the newer M-4 which is also popular with the special forces.
Unless and until the "government" can guarantee people complete safety in their homes, places of work or worship, or just out and around shopping, strolling, there will be 80 million Americans that will NOT relinquish their firearms.
XDm9mm.........you do not need an assault weapon or an automatic weapon to defend your home and family. Furthermore, most semi automatic weapons can be changed into full automatic weapons by any competent gunsmith in about 10 minutes. I am not anti gun, I own many and have for almost 50 years, I do feel we need a lot more control and ways to keep guns out of the hands or people who are not responsible. The country is flooded with guns and weak laws have made it easy for criminals and nut cases to get hold of guns. It is not the responsible gun owner that I am concerned with, it is the ease with which crininals and nuts can get their hands on guns.
MM if your a gun owner then why are you calling a semi-automatic rifle an Assault weapon, which is nothing more than a euphemism for the word Assault rifle. Besides "Assault weapons" make up less than 1% of all gun crime in the US. Ah no most semi-automatic can't be changed that quickly. That would be like saying any competent car mechanic can change a manual transmission to a automatic.
Now people who used to get into fistfights can just shoot each other in public because they feel threatened.
Well now that means I'm starting to feel threatened by people who carry guns around. I don't know you. Why should I trust you? Guess that means I can shoot on sight.
Start practicing your quick-draw skills, Floridians. If the only way for me to protect myself from hotheaded NRA nutjobs is to arm up also, maybe I will.
Why is it that everyone who does not agree with someones point-of-view is referred to a nut job? Just curious.
Once again they use misleading terminology, automatic weapons are already highly regulated you need to be finger printed and a back ground check by the FBI also you need to buy an expensive tax stamp and you need to lock up any automatic weapons in a safe.
Unless you have a lot of money owning an automatic weapon is not possible.
Paul.... it's NOT that expensive. But the beaucratic maze can be daunting. The big issue is the ammo. A full auto can eat a whole bunch of $$ in ammo VERY QUICKLY!!!!
The last time I checked into an automatic weapon I believe the tax stamp was about a thousand dollars and it had to renewed every ten years. The price of the weapon was extremely expensive.
What would be a ball park figure for a full can of ammo for an automatic weapon? I realize it would be different for different weapons, but perhaps a couple of examples would suffice.
Paul, the tax stamp for a automatic is a one time fee.. I haven't looked lately, but if I remember correctly the last I looked it ws $500.
culheath...
of course it IS predicated on caliber, but for example,
I recently bought 5000 rounds of 9mm handgun ammo for just over $1100.00 (I go through about 2 - 3 thousand a month at the range. I also reload but that's another issue.)
A 5000 canister of say 7.62 ammo (the stuff that would feed an M-60 machine gun) would probably run in the ball park of about $2500.00 or more depending on manufacturer. I don't buy in that quantity so I've never really paid that much attention and for my rifle needs, I almost always use rounds I've reloaded myself. I have better control over quality that way.
I hpoe that helps. As you can see, the shooting sports are NOT inexpensive hobbies to pursue.
I could legally get a Class 3 license (required for full auto ownership) but the rest of the requirements I choose not to allow so I don't apply. With a Class 3 you have certain storage requirements and the BATFE can show up unannounced anytime to inspect. If you don't have proper storage they can revoke your license and confiscate your firearms. I'm not interested in extending that invitation. :)
Thanks, yes it does. I had no idea it was that expensive. Most of the people I know that own guns are people who reload their casings as well. With prices like that, I can now see why.
I think I need to study the classification system and check out more state laws before I do much more arguing. Thanks again for making me a ware of my relative ignorance. Appreciate it.
Perhaps, just perhaps, all the liberals that hate guns, and the right of private citizens to own, and carry them for self-defense will now realize they are part of a SMALL MINORITY.
Al Gore learned a BIG lesson from this.
The American people, Republican, Democrat, and Independent, VALUE our Second Amendment rights.
If you don't like it, move to the UK...
Mike,
I am a raging liberal as many on the Vine know, but I am not anti-gun per se so much as I am gun proliferation and the paranoid world view basis I think the NRA and other lobbying interests push in face of declining rates of violent crime.
culheath, most of the anti-liberal establishment would be surprised to know how many of we progressives actually support the 2nd Amendment and people's right to bear arms. Unfortunately the NRA has brainwashed them into thinking that gun control laws equate to gun elimination laws which is so far from fact.
culheath,
I don't believe it's paranoia, as much as the knowledge and acceptance that the "police" will not necessarily be there to stop the bad guy that one time he/she is needed.
And while I agree that "violent" crime is on the decrease, it is STILL a factor in our lives. Because I haven't had the need to draw my firearm to protect a person in over ten years, does that mean I might not need it for that purpose tomorrow? Those of us who carry do so not to be macho or threatening.. quite the contrary, the vast majority of us do so because like auto or home owners insurance, you don't need it all the time.... but that one time you DO need it, you really, really need it.
" I am not anti-gun per se so much as I am gun proliferation..."
I felt the same way until I saw what the dyed-in-the-wool gun nuts post, and then I began to rethink my position. I know a fair bit about the NRA, as a friend of mine is a member and active in the organization. Even he admits the NRA misrepresents facts and distorts truth, and he's been a member for at least 30 years.
I believe the 2nd Amend. is poorly interpreted, and I do not like being part of a society that drums up excuses to carry firearms in normal society. I think too many of these folks believe they are far more important and influential, if they are armed. We can't screen potential gun owners effectively enough, so, until we can, I support very strict control of guns and gun sales.
So how can we develop a rational dialogue between the pro-gun and anti-gun camps in order to come up with regulations that fit reality rather than just smashing our philosophical differences into each other.
I want people to be able to protect themselves of course and know the police will often not show up on time, but I also think the Stand Your Ground laws are based on an unrealistic fear of what is out there in the real world and make the situation of recent Martin/Zimmerman case all the more likely because there are so many untrained and inept gun owners out there.
"So how can we develop a rational dialogue between the pro-gun and anti-gun camps..."
I don't know, but I'd be interested in seeing what others might propose. My primary concern is that not enough who carry and conceal would be interested in what you propose, and I doubt there would be little interest in their participating.
I also suspect that reasonable and rational will not be defined by the involved parties, but, having said that, I repeat that I would be very much interested in such an effort.
I am NRA and believe that if when a person is convicted of murder and is sentenced to "Life" they never get out except in a coffin, instead of the 6 - 8 years they currently spend behind bars and then look for those that testified against them (That's why so many won't help the police). Also, harder sentences (without any time off for good conduct) for all other violent crimes.
With that kind of system violent crime would plummet and you wouldn't even think about gun control, because crime would be down and less people would carry.
When I was a kid in the 60's and 70's this subject was never discussed. My father would take me to the East River in Brooklyn and we would shoot rats with our 22 rifle (Sears - Ted Williams, Tube Loader). The police would roll up on us and ask what we were up to and my dad would tell them "Shooting rats." they would say, "OK, be careful" and drive off.
Many schools back then had shooting teams, with a range in the school. The kids would carry their rifles to school on the school bus, store them in their locker and no school shootings! In fact, Columbine was the first.
I read this somewhere " We don't have a gun problem, we have an idiot problem" I like that idea!
Columbine was not the first school shooting Google First school shooting you see it was a sixteen year old girl who when asked why said "I hate Mondays" The year was 1977 if I remember correctly.
SEAN-336944,
Just wondering, what is YOUR solution to crime prevention and personal safety? Or don't you believe people should protect THEMSELVES? If so, how?
SEAN-336944,
You seem to exhibit the stereotypical attributes of a long lost ( and useless) discipline--philososphy. You 1) argue ad nauseum for the purpose of tearing down others thoughts and stating the OBVIOUS flaws, and 2) never offer a SOLUTION of your own (afraid to subject it to your kind of scrutiny, eh?). Of course, a true philosopher would never admit there IS a solution to ANY problem. That is why they are useless in problem resolution. That is also why the ancient Greeks put so many of them to death. Say, you are against the death penalty, right? A little bit of self-preservation?? So, I ask again, WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION TO CRIME AND HOW CAN THE INDIVIDUAL PROTECT HIMSELF FROM BEING A VICTIM? And please, saying " Not with a gun" DOESN'T answer my question.
Can't wait for the poll on how people view the national news media.
Depends on which "national media" is being included. Contrary to what Fox News suggests, there are truly independent and reliable sources of news.
Name one.
I think we all know that it would break the "lack of confidence" meter
I suspect at least the way the questions where worded has skewed the results. To most gun owners an Automatic weapon is just that fully automatic, to most of the others it's a semi auto. Why don't these very liberal news people make the questions they ask clear and not subject to personal interpertation? Could it be they profit by confusion, so they can push their own agenda?
bingo!!!! we have a winner!!!!!!
All media have a bias, some are more subtle than others, but all have a bias and agenda
do you really have to ask?
This whole argument is kind of ridiculous. The United Supreme Court just ruled on the Constitutionality of bearing arms. What it meant and when we can. For instance as a non-felon with my carry permit I can carry my 9mm semi-auto hidden pretty much anywhere I want. In order for you to stop me from doing that you are going to have to change the Unite States Constitution. Good luck with that. So live with that fact or go cry in a conner somewhere.
See now I consider that a dangerous and stupid attitude. It's self-centered and lacks consideration of the variables that accompany a complex society.
LOL Amercians
Gun limits are in place. Nothing new here. Motives of the ani-gun group are well known. They help increase sales of guns and ammo.
There are currently 50 thousand anti gun laws that limit gun ownership or the types of guns you can own, and they all impose on the right to bear arms.
Everyone of those laws are illegal and unconstitutional. When ever ANYONE has a problem with a gun the cops show up and remove all guns in legal possession from your house. They use what ever excuse they can to remove guns from law abiding citizens therefore violating the constitution each and every time.
Apparently the police seem to think that they are the only ones capable of using deadly force,...really? I have some news for you pigs on that one, your wrong! Seems to me that the real criminals are the police!
As far as using a gun against an attacker or criminal, they should be shot dead on the spot period. All criminals, gangsters, all gang bangers, cartel members, kidnappers, robbers, rapists, murderous thugs, or anyone who hurts another person can kiss my A$$ and burn in the fire's of hell for an eternity.
Criminals 0, Law abiding citizens 1, you lose low life.
My friends was shot 3 times by her estranged husband, a hunter and has carry permit, he waited till the kids were at camp, showed up and pulled a gun. She ran out the back door, while he's shooting at her, jumped a fence made it to the neighbors were they let her in. She lived lost her spleen and has had many complications. But at least her kids still have their mother, and he is in jail.
All his family and friends couldn't believe he did that, even blamed her.
I don't feel safer, knowing a bunch of random people are packing, in fact it makes me nervous.
Church is no place for a gun, and bars anyplace that alcohol is served is just asking for trouble!
You must not feel safe with a bunch of people driving cars or packing matches or owning baseball bats.
Big Jim: Would your scenario exclude emotionally immature, not just nut cases? Obviously not, since DUI drivers, casual and deliberate arsonists, and bullies with basefall bats are enough of an occurrence among the "uncommon occurrences" to flood our news on a daily basis.
I think the crux of being "safe" lies with the individual who thinks and acts responsibly, and wisely (key word) in Society. Your argument appears to be a "non-response".
1hucares , please reread. Your reading skill leave much to be desired. I did not give you a scenario. A baffoon of a response on your part.
There is nothing I support about the NRA. They fight every regulation to help us control guns in the US. We need good gun checks to find out who owns a gun and limit those with records. Gun shows are a joke, and the NRA continues to support them. The worst thing that could have happened to America was Heston and his leadership. What an awful man. We have guns in our home. I am not anti gun, just proper regulations to guide who has them and the type of gun allowed. The NRA could be a great organization and lead America to more responsible ownership but they are so hard core they will not move on any issues. No womens vote from me when you pander to this association like the male repubs do all the time.
The NRA fights the anti-gun nutters who only want to BAN ALL GUNS. Common Sense Gun Laws is newspeak for ban guns.
Chicago and DC have some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and the worst gun related crime. Yet people like you keep harping on gun control. Admit it, what you really want to do is disarm conservative males in America because you are full of hate. How about demanding that the people who are doing the crimes with illegal weapons are arrested, especially in the inner cities? How about getting you head out of your feminist anus.
Of course, that would require larger police forces (and higher taxes to pay them). With so many tea partiers demanding tax cuts, that's not likely to happen.
Then, perhaps, the NRA would outline the "common sense" regulations that it would support? As the poll points out, while the public supports the NRA, it also supports gun limits. If the NRA persists in its reflexive position against all gun laws, it risks going the path of the Catholic Church which, in the name of ideological purity, is slowing making itself irrelevant in American society.
If there are guns in your home good for you, I guess that means that you only think that others shouldn't own guns.
The nra needs to set gun ownership parameters. For example, how many guns per 100 should there be. There are 90 guns per 100 people now. Should their goal be 98 or 95 guns per 100 people. Somalia is 2nd highest with 30 guns. I couldn't tell you. The Nra would say 120.
Should be 300 guns for every 100 people. A rifle , pistole , and shotgun per person minimum.
500!
1 large cal. Rifle - Bad guys, Deer, Hogs, Etc.
1 small Cal. Rifle - Target, Bunnies, Etc.
1 large cal. Pistol - Bad guys
1 small Cal. Pistol - Target
1 Shotgun - Bad guys, Quackers, Deer, Hogs, Etc.
What this lame Brady backed add campaign fails to mention is that while appox. 25 thousand idiots die from accidently shooting themselves each year, plus murders, gang bangers murdering people, and police killing criminals, there are also 250,000 crimes prevented lives' saved each and every year BECAUSE OF GUN OWNERSHIP IN THIS COUNTRY ALONE.
It seems they accidently left out that bit of factual information.
What we need in an unbiased accounting of such things with tallies of the costs and benefits laid out side by without all the philosophical and political pandering that pollutes such discussions. I accept that being free entails some levels of risk. But I want to be safe from people too who are willing to risk my life based on some extreme idea about constitutional absolutes.
Culheath , constitulional absolutes is the best weapon against extremist.
I know what you are saying, but we have a big philosophical argument brewing there. To me black and white positions are frequently the cause and not the solution to problems. But that's another topic hopefully we can argue at length sometime. I don't want to get into here because I think it's a distraction from the real issue which is the basis for the proliferation of handguns as a problem in itself.
culheath , please continue. I like that 1st amendment as much as the 2nd amendment.
I don't think that leaveing out that information was an accident