Victim disarmament zones

[r00t]

It's a dangerous world, it's more insane not to be armed at all times

[aowen]

Actually, that was a study conducted by the NRA using telephone interviews. Read the Justice Department study that actually has all of the records of shootings. That numbers drops to about 1/35 that number.

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

lolno. Guns are used in defense MORE often than illegally


Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives

Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun," 86 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall 1995):164.

Also this

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthi...by-someone-wit

[Champion_Standing]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There are almost no instances of a public shooter being stopped by another citizen with a gun, minus the police, because it is super rare to have a gun at your side or in your jacket in public places unless you have malicious intentions.

Wrong, there are plenty of them, the media just doesn't eat them up because it won't support the gun control agenda. There was a relatively recent shooting at a mall in Oregon that was stopped by a young guy with a pistol. There have been several other recent instances as well. There are far MORE shootings that are stopped short because of private citizens with guns than there are "successful" rampages.

The sad reality is that someone stopping a would be mass murderer just doesn't make for exciting news.

[Nuggie]

Originally Posted by Stinkum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

WOOO! #1 in DEATH from GUNS! so PROUD!

U! S! A!

U! S! A!

* stands up and salutes the flag, as a lone tear rolls down my cheek *

Is that total deaths? or a gun death percentage?

Would make sense for us having more gun deaths than al the European countries since we have a much larger population.

[Kagatob]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Indeed I have, and I am aware bad shit happens. That doesn't mean I am going to sit around wasting my time thinking about how I could die at any moment. When you get into a car do you sit there and fret about a drunk driver slamming you? Am I going to blast someone for taking my TV? If someone wants to put a bullet in me aim for the head please. Live your damn life without shit in your pants.

The things white boys in their upper-middle-class neighborhoods say can be so cute sometimes.
As someone who's had their apartment broken into 3 times I take personal offense to this ridiculous statement. Poster needs a reality check.

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Plus most homicides are done by people you know fairly well, not some random ass off the street. And to be honest I don't much care to kill someone over my possessions, disappointed as I'd be about losing certain things that are irreplaceable.

Someone already beat me to Chicago

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Owning a gun for self-defense to me indicates you have at least thought enough about someone breaking and doing bad things to you to justify spending a few hundred minimum, which would require a level of fear greater than is really needed, for a scenario that usually does not play out the way people envision.

Must be nice to have an easy life where you've never needed to know fear.

I envy you, no troll.

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, the implication of the statement is that someone you know is going be able to kill you without you being on lockdown in your house with your gun at your side. As I posted an article to, only a couple hundred deaths a year from guns are in self-defense, whereas thousands of homicides from aggressors are reported. I dont think lack of guns on the defense side is the reason for this.

I know why you think what you are thinking, but you are wrong, dangerously wrong in fact. I don't blame you personally, just your upper-middle-class upbringing.

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well luckily seat belts cost me nothing, are required by law, and prevent you from killing others in car crashes. A gun is meant for killing, whether it be in defense or not, whereas a seat belt is for preserving life. I hazard to guess that guns rarely prevent the taking of more life than life they take. So comparing seat belts to guns is a stupid angle to argue

Explain this please. I really want to know your line of "reasoning" here.

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think a part of this debate that is missing too is that not all guns are equal. Most people, including myself, don't have a problem if people want to keep a shotgun around for defense. Shotguns can't be concealed and are effective at home defense. They are also more difficult to use to kill massive amounts of people when someone decides to lose their shit. Pistols and assault weapons are the real point of contention, pistols because they are exclusively used to kill people and can be concealed, assault weapons for obvious reasons.

So you're a hypocrite then. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Nuggie]

Originally Posted by Champion_Standing [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Wrong, there are plenty of them, the media just doesn't eat them up because it won't support the gun control agenda. There was a relatively recent shooting at a mall in Oregon that was stopped by a young guy with a pistol. There have been several other recent instances as well. There are far MORE shootings that are stopped short because of private citizens with guns than there are "successful" rampages.

The sad reality is that someone stopping a would be mass murderer just doesn't make for exciting news.

Word, Liberal media supports liberal agenda.

And the Liberals get crazy because Fox goes equally in the opposite direction. Hypocrites.

[r00t]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, that was a study conducted by the NRA using telephone interviews. Read the Justice Department study that actually has all of the records of shootings. That numbers drops to about 1/35 that number.

Nope. The 2.5 million figure is consistent with a mountain of other independent surveys showing similar figures. The sponsors of these studies -- nearly a dozen -- are quite varied, and include anti-gun organizations, news media organizations, governments and commercial polling firms. For example, even anti-gun researchers who were commissioned by the Clinton Justice Department found there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense with a firearm every year. [Source: Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," NIJ Research in Brief (May 1997).]

[Nuggie]

Aowen losing at forumquest

[aowen]

Lol kagatob acts like he knows me. I grew up in a neighborhood in a certain city in Texas. The neighborhood has a high crime rate. I would hear gunshots quite often. I once had to lay down on a field after a drive by went down. Almost everyone had guns. My upbringing was very middle class, not upper. None of this has anything to do with the gun debate though, which is why almost your entire post means nothing.

I don't live in fear and live my life, you wanna be penned up in your basement petting your shotgun and pulling your pud, you do that. And my reasoning for why shotguns are permitted are blatantly obvious, and already stated. Unless you don't understand slugs, shot, spread, distance, rate of fire, and size of the gun vs pistols and assault weapons.

[aowen]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nope. The 2.5 million figure is consistent with a mountain of other independent surveys showing similar figures. The sponsors of these studies -- nearly a dozen -- are quite varied, and include anti-gun organizations, news media organizations, governments and commercial polling firms. For example, even anti-gun researchers who were commissioned by the Clinton Justice Department found there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense with a firearm every year. [Source: Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," NIJ Research in Brief (May 1997).]

Again http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/...nsive-gun-use/

NRA study is first thing on the menu