guns

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Island, according to the numbers, accidental shootings (as in mistaken identity) are far more common than actually firing on an intruder. But all those people are so dumb that "they don't need to extend their bloodline anyway", right?
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
All this talk about guns killing innocent kids, good thing Adam Lanza didn't grow up to become President and be in control of all those drones. And lets not even talk about Iraq.

Yet you want to judge Lanza and Holmes as crazy because they picked up a gun and mowed down a few innocent people while the leaders of this nation acting in your name, per your vote kill so many innocent people it makes Lanza and Holmes look like Citizens of the Year. Even Hannibal Lecter almost looks human.

Tell "YOUR" President (I didn't vote for that murderer so he ain't my President) to stop all the killings of innocent people across the planet and then I might begin to take your arguments for gun control serious at least from the perspective of being honest and sincere. But until then, I find you nothing more than the hypocrite you are.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Well, wk, I partially agree with you. I am a hypocrite, as are most people who are honest with themselves. I don't think you are a hypocrite, but I do think you are being intellectually honest either. Your assertion seems to be that there should be no war. Noble though the sentiment, it is fantasy. Human history says so. I don't know even agree with the wars we have been in in the last decade plus, but I think drones and special ops is a far better option as far as civilian casualties are concerned than carpet bombing and fire bombing cities. So why not just have all out war and devastation, pestilence and famine? Let the Apocalypse begin! And while we're at it, let's let everybody have any weapon they want. Screw gun control! Let's have no control at all. No restraint. Kill 'em all. Don't be a hypocrite. All or nothing. An anarchist's wet dream fantasy.
 
Would you say that to someone who had just tragically made that mistake? It's not like it's an uncommon occurrence.

You're weaving in your argument. Either it's responsible gun ownership or its not.
A responsible gun owner will not blindly blast away without assessing the situation as I previously posted. OR.....the irresponsible gun owner will go Gunfight at the Ok Coral and in which case should never have owned the gun in he first place.
You're arguing an ACTION rather than the method. It could be equally argued that "He jumped out of bed at the sound in his house, saw a shape in the dark, and grabbed his (gun, knife, baseball bat, mace, nun-chucks, ray gun, etc ) and began to ( shoot, stab, swing,spray,Kung fu,stun or disintergrate,etc ) and tragically found out it was his loved one.

Now, what would I say to someone who shot a family member as you asked? To their face I'll say " sorry for your loss". In the privacy of discussion with other people it would be " if that's what he was going to do then he should have not had a gun in the first place".
 
Last edited:

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
And the fact is, that by the numbers, there are in fact a great number of irresponsible gun owners who shouldn't have guns. And the numbers suggest that when a gun is fired in the home the tendancy is for an unintended consequence. How shall we now test the mental fitness of these owners, since that is where the problem lies. It's not the guns, it's the people with the guns. I think we agree on that.
 
And the fact is, that by the numbers, there are in fact a great number of irresponsible gun owners who shouldn't have guns. And the numbers suggest that when a gun is fired in the home the tendancy is for an unintended consequence. How shall we now test the mental fitness of these owners, since that is where the problem lies. It's not the guns, it's the people with the guns. I think we agree on that.

A person who shoots a loved one in the middle of the night might be the most sane competent person in the world. His ACTION in that high stress situation of shooting first means that , for him, a gun might not be the wisest choice. Better of with a big dog that will wag its tail at the unexpected family and kill the intruder.
 

Nimnim

The Nim
that would Suck almost as much as a main course of "Oops. That's my son sneaking in, not a gang banging intruder!"

My rifle is never loaded at home,(unless I'm under the impression that I will be attacked, not happened yet though) but I'm able to load it quickly, if caught off guard well I have a sturdy club.

And yes, I'd be doing the same here. There's no mistaken identity of family if you've done this.

6) also while the first 4 have been going on a audit of where the three kids are will have gone on and by now they will be accounted for and in one location.
 

Babagounj

Strength through joy
[h=2]GEICO Does Its Part in the War on Guns[/h] If you have been avoiding the aptly named Progressive Insurance because its chairman Peter Lewis is a zillionaire financier of ultra-left causes in the mold of George Soros, don’t turn to GEICO as a countermoonbat alternative. We have already seen how GEICO fired the beloved Gunny for voicing opinions unflattering to the Moonbat Messiah. Now we are told that someone had their car insurance canceled as punishment for making gun parts for a living:

GEICO is owned by the Obama crony Warren Buffett.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
bbsam,

You dodged the question.

If you truly look at the Governments statistics on gun murders by far --close to NINETY percent are illegal guns and criminals --many gangbangers.

Included in the government numbers are justified shootings by Police and Justified defense shootings by legal gun owners.

Why are all the restrictions and banning laws aimed at less than TEN percent of the problem ???

The 90% gets ignored ---so politically correct ---do not have a war with CHICAGO gangs---How sad ---Our elected so called leaders are not COURAGEOUS----yes I will keep plugging that movie that truly exposes the ROOT cause of Poverty and Crime and lays out the SOLUTION that the politicians do not have the Brains or COURAGE to do .

President Obama is the most powerful man in the world. While he is great at speeches ---He ignores the real problems of our society and believes that re-distributing wealth from the earners --will turn around the the problems of babies being pumped out with no fathers ---throwing and wasting generation after generation to a life of gangs, drugs crime and waste.
The solutions he is pushing ENABLES this so called lifestyle to continue .:sick:
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
I walked very easy on RACE in the above post ---but let me state something --reverse racism to try to make a point.

If you look at the past twenty years --the shooting incidents that politicians jump all over involve many White victims but the total deaths in over twenty years is around 125---I know any death is bad.

If the U.S. has over TEN THOUSAND gun murders per year ---Why all the attention on the school ,mall and movie shootings ---RATHER than the real problem ???? Can anyone truthfully answer that ????

We talk of gun bans and new laws for the 125 --but completely ignore the hundreds per day in the major cities.

If it was not so so sad --it would actually be funny --the actions by our "leaders":sick:
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
What makes you think the 90% gets ignored? If assault rifles were banned (which they won't be) then it would be illegal for ANYONE to own them. And I have said before and repeat again that the solution to gun violence is much bigger than gun control legislation but it is the thing that gets the most buzz. Beside people are becoming.more rational. Background checks seems to be the route they will go. This is not the solution to crime and poverty. Just a small step in the right direction.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
What makes you think the 90% gets ignored? If assault rifles were banned (which they won't be) then it would be illegal for ANYONE to own them. And I have said before and repeat again that the solution to gun violence is much bigger than gun control legislation but it is the thing that gets the most buzz. Beside people are becoming.more rational. Background checks seems to be the route they will go. This is not the solution to crime and poverty. Just a small step in the right direction.


bbsam,

Just love the liberal thinking. The 90% of the problem OBEY NO LAWS-----------putting more restrictions and laws on the people that obey the laws will do NOTHING to stop the CRIMINALS. How about a little common sense here.

Forbid people to own assault rifles --I obey --the guy kicking my door in holding an assault rifle can care less about backround checks, bans or how many bullets HE can have in his gun .

Wake Up !!:sad-little:
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
What makes you think the 90% gets ignored? If assault rifles were banned (which they won't be) then it would be illegal for ANYONE to own them. And I have said before and repeat again that the solution to gun violence is much bigger than gun control legislation but it is the thing that gets the most buzz. Beside people are becoming.more rational. Background checks seems to be the route they will go. This is not the solution to crime and poverty. Just a small step in the right direction.

I know I will feel relieved to know that all those black market gun transactions won't be able to take place until the criminals contact the government to get their background checked prior to their illegal gun purchase. :knockedout:
 
Top