Gun Control II

[Bothwell]

With the events of the weekend, 7 dead in Wisconsin, a 2 year old shot by his 4 year old brother using his mothers gun, are any of you in the USA rethinking your views on gun control. Especially sad is the latter case, what sort of mother allows a loaded gun to be within reach of a toddler. I am sure the poor woman is in pieces right now but for God's sake how does this happen.

I know it is in the constitution as the right to bear arms but I would love to know the statistics on how many citizens have actually managed to successfully defend themselves or their properties with a privately held weapon as opposed to the number of accidental shootings. Why did this woman think carrying a loaded gun around would make her more safe.

In addition every year I see shootings that happen accidently as the person is "Cleaning" the weapon, what you mean is lovingly caressing a loaded gun because you get a kick out of it, how can you clean a gun properly with a round in the chamber?

[kmhowe72]

The constitition allows you to bear weapons . It doesn't say BARE GUNS

[lady cop]

kmhowe72 wrote: The constitition allows you to bear weapons . It doesn't say BARE GUNSactually, it is the right to BEAR ARMS...which means guns. ...over here, Bothwell, as you know, she will be prosecuted for leaving the weapon where a child could get it. and i'm going to tell you something borne of my experience, there is no earthly reason that female had a loaded weapon in her purse unless she's dealing. and i would like to know if she had a licence to carry concealed, somehow i doubt it. ...and as you also know , from your own experience with weapons and from cleaning my weapon,:) you break the gun down before cleaning, you are SURE there isn't one in the chamber.

[greydeadhead]

Mom is gonna have to live with what she did.. and she should be prosecuted.. as far as the other shootings go.. if a person is gonna buy a weapon.. you cannot stop them. Shure we can pass other laws prohibiting people from buying weapons.. but that will not stop them.. private gun sales.. the back of trucks.. illegal weapons dealers.. gun shows... all kinds of ways to purchase weapons... trust me.. I am not a huge supporter of the right to bear arms.. but you can't stop what you can't see...

[kmhowe72]

Well i am not condoning for what happened. But the last I looked at the consitiution It didn't say anything about having a gun. The word gun nor pistol is in that document. It could be a cross bow or a hammer used has a weapon. I heard that in Texa's just recently a judge had a gun under her coat. To protect herself.

Now I don't like guns. But I believe that women especially have the right to carry some weapon especially when they have children to protect. I myself have been talking it over with my husband . and might get a teaser. So you don't have to be a druggy to have gun, or to deal.

[lady cop]

kmhowe72 wrote: Well i am not condoning for what happened. But the last I looked at the consitiution It didn't say anything about having a gun. The word gun nor pistol is in that document. It could be a cross bow or a hammer used has a weapon. I heard that in Texa's just recently a judge had a gun under her coat. To protect herself.



Now I don't like guns. But I believe that women especially have the right to carry some weapon especially when they have children to protect. I myself have been talking it over with my husband . and might get a teaser. So you don't have to be a druggy to have gun, or to deal. at the time the Constitution was written it did indeed refer to guns. back then "bear arms" meant guns, not hammers or anything else. it was a time of revolution in this country.further, NOBODY , male or female has the right to carry concealed without a licence, i don't care whether they have kids or not. the judge is one of many who have licence to carry concealed for obvious reasons. and i repeat, in my experience females with guns in purses are either licenced, or cops, or dealers. they need to protect their cash and product. and nobody in their right mind would leave a loaded weapon around. as for getting a "teaser", i think you mean taser, just know this...don't ever carry a weapon thst you are not prepared to have taken away from you and used against you.

[Paula]

LC, i am shocked to see how you spelled licence? Isn't that supposed to be spelled license? I just checked my license and it is spelled LICENSE. Working with the law you better take a look at that.

Your response has much energy and accurate information. :yh_glasse

[lady cop]

Paula wrote: LC, i am shocked to see how you spelled licence? Isn't that supposed to be spelled license? I just checked my license and it is spelled LICENSE. Working with the law you better take a look at that.



Your response has much energy and accurate information. :yh_glassePaula, how are you? i have , for some time used the British spellings for many things since i am planning to move over there, but that was very astute of you! LOL i do like your new avatar also!

[Paula]

no excuses, you are either British or American? One or the other, no mixing! While we are promoting grammar here, what does astute mean? On-line english, help me out, i know you will.

[greydeadhead]

ummmm.. LC.. hate to burst your bubble.. but there is no law requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Vermont.. the state is right to carry....

[lady cop]

Hey, I'm allowed to have dual citizenship and either spelling is correct! astute just means a sharp mind. so take THIS---neighbourhood, behaviour, favourite...heh heh. have to go, will see you later on. Paula, find the 'Hilarious John Cleese bit 'thread in just for the fun of it, it covers a lot of this! i don't want to hijack Bothwell's thread.

[lady cop]

greydeadhead wrote: ummmm.. LC.. hate to burst your bubble.. but there is no law requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Vermont.. the state is right to carry....you are correct, each state is different.i tend to think in terms of my own state. i am waiting to hear whether she is being charged and what the charges are.

[A Karenina]

Bothwell wrote: With the events of the weekend, 7 dead in Wisconsin, a 2 year old shot by his 4 year old brother using his mothers gun, are any of you in the USA rethinking your views on gun control.
Hey there Bothwell.



I think it's important to re-visit issues periodically, and rethinking the gun control issue is no exception. But I also think it's important to consider the realities in context, and not be swayed by a rash of tragic events. Going even further, I also think it's important to realize that problems always occur no matter what the laws are, and that we can address problems without being radical in our decision-making.



So, my final answer is that yes I could rethink it, but in this case my position remains the same: pro-gun.



It is also interesting to note that even with all of these horrible deaths, car accidents still take more lives per year than guns do, the majority of gun deaths are still suicides, and that disease is a bigger killer than anything else. How smart is it to concentrate our resources on one issue that isn't as deadly as many other issues are? (I'm sincerely asking for input on that one.)

[Bothwell]

AK I agree, I was one of the gun owners in the Uk that had to surrender 7 weapons (they were a historic collection, I was not a potential nutter) to be destroyed. Only last month 5 year gun crime figures here showed a rise in gun crime since the ban. Guess what the baddies did not surrender their weapons, surprise surprise. I suppose what I mean is that the key must be RESPONSIBLE gun ownership. I swear half these people must have no idea of the potential damage that can be caused.



In the case of access for children then this woman was just plain stupid.



The car statistic fits the following quote from Winston Churchill "There are lies, damn lies and statistics". AK there must be a gadzillion car journeys taken everyday in the USA so when you balance the deaths against the journeys taken then the figures would not seem so bad.



You would need to see comparative figures for an injury every time a weapon was used to have a proper comparison.



OK I have a radical suggestion, why have any concealed carry laws except for LE. If you want a gun damn well strap it on you where everyone can see it, why hide it, you have it to use it I presume so take any doubts out of people's minds and show them you are carrying one.

[A Karenina]

Bothwell wrote: The car statistic fits the following quote from Winston Churchill "There are lies, damn lies and statistics". AK there must be a gadzillion car journeys taken everyday in the USA so when you balance the deaths against the journeys taken then the figures would not seem so bad.



You would need to see comparative figures for an injury every time a weapon was used to have a proper comparison.
Excellent point. You're right. (I always like it when I get a new spin on something. )



Still...and I'm not sure how to phrase this well...is our "enemy" guns or is it death/safety? I would say that if death is what we're trying to avoid (or delay as long as possible), then the statistics of use versus death isn't as important as population versus cause of death. Not sure if that's making sense or not.





Bothwell wrote: OK I have a radical suggestion, why have any concealed carry laws except for LE. If you want a gun damn well strap it on you where everyone can see it, why hide it, you have it to use it I presume so take any doubts out of people's minds and show them you are carrying one.
I'm just gonna be cruelly blunt, LOL! That's not radical, Bothwell! That's reasonable. It's a very good suggestion, and I see no need for concealed weapons to be part of our freedom to defend ourselves, hunt, play sports or anything else.



I am sad to hear that you had to give up your gun collection. Do you think that the law will be reversed now that 5-year statistics are showing an increase in crime?

[greydeadhead]

Well.. either concealed or unconcealed.. it is not the weapon that pulls the trigger.. or am I wrong about that.. until the flow of weapons to the criminal element can be eliminated, and irresponsible gun owners adequately punished.. you are gonna have events like the 4 year old.. the Wisconsin event was out of the ordinary .. atleast from what I have read so far.. but still a psychological evaluation might not be a bad thing before allowing someone to own a weapon.. especially an easily concealed one like a handgun

[Bothwell]

AK - No there is no chance of it being reversed, they are gone forever, what really annoyed me was that as historical weapons the compensation from the government was very low. they were only valued as their age and calibre not in the context of the collection. I had a Lee-Enfield .302 MkIII* that was isued to the Middlesex Bicycle Regiment (yes we really had one of those) in 1914 and I had the whole provenance, probably worth about £650 then, I got £57 !!



Greydeadhead, I think one of the points about the use of guns is that it is IMO opinion easier to mete out death or injury by a little squeeze on a trigger from a reasonable distance than it is by say hitting someone. I have no idea of the answer to this one but I thought a psychological test was carried out!!



Also why do the states vary, are inhabitants of one state more mentally balanced than others (please no State v state jokes). surely one common law in the whole US would make sense.

[Jives]

I sold all my guns when I was 25 because of a stupid incident where I was drunk, got in a fight with seven other guys in the hills and almost killed them all.....they had jumped my friend and kicked him in the head. When I saw his neck snap back to an odd angle and he quit moving, I decided that he was dead and that I had to kill all of his killers immediately.

I grabbed my 16-shot semi-auto .22 rifle out of the back of the car and drew down on them, intending to end every one of their lives for killing my friend. Luckily, my friend regained consciousness right at that moment, sparing me a life-ending mistake.

Worse yet, when I was selling the guns, one of my friends slammed the clip in and before I could grab the rifle, he had accidentally shot off a round that ricocheted off the floor and went through the apartment next door. (luckily not killing anyone.)

That was enough for me. I'm not responsible enough to have a weapon.

Oh... and here in New mexico, you do need a concealed carry permit, but since no one wants to go through the classes, we all strap them on our hips ala Wild West days. It's not uncommon to even see a woman shopping with a hip holster. I'm betting that 70% of all New mexicans have a weapon handy at all times. (It's OK to have one in your car too.) :rolleyes:

[BabyRider]

Ah, yes...my favorite issue. Nothing I have read here will change my view on gun control. I do however have a new opinion on stupid people being allowed to procreate.

Bothwell, there is a thread here that gave stats on the percentages of children being killed by guns compared to other ways. I will find it and add it here.

Backyard swimming pools are 3 times more responsible for children's deaths than guns. Doctors are also a higher cause of child mortality than guns.

As for who carries, it is not only dealers who do this. My fiance has 2 CCW's, and he is no drug dealer. He is always armed, and it makes me feel pretty safe.

I believe that the reason for the "concealed" is that if anyone was allowed to walk around with a gun in plain sight, there is a possibility for panic. I don't know that for sure, I am just assuming. It's what makes sense to me.

Bothwell said it himself: The guns were taken from law-abiding citizens, and what happened?? Shock of shocks...gun crimes are on the rise. Holy cow, how did that happen??? The bad guys will always have their weapons, laws be damned. When people can't protect themselves, the bad guys will take advantage of that. They do it every time.

Nope. I don't see my views on this subject changing a bit.

[kmhowe72]

Still even if you think that the consitution has guns excatly in words in the constition. Let me put to you a different way. When the constition was written we(or them) were fighting a war against england. It didn't say we have the right to kill each othere with arms. It said we have the right to protect ourselves. Ok. That doesn't mean we have to use guns. THE WORD GUN WAS NEVER USED IN THE CONSTITION PERIOD!

That is an iference, meaning that's the assumed weapon to protect youselves. In these troubling times, were people are killing each othere left and write. You think it's wise not have some GUN controll. We don't live in times when Indians or revoultionarys knock at are front door.

I think the best way is just to be able to contain a person without the use of the gun. Teaser's, sticks, rocks, are preffilably Availble even rubber bullets.

[Dixiespurgirl]

kmhowe72 wrote:

That is an iference, meaning that's the assumed weapon to protect youselves. In these troubling times, were people are killing each othere left and write. You think it's wise not have some GUN controll. We don't live in times when Indians or revoultionarys knock at are front door.

I think the best way is just to be able to contain a person without the use of the gun. Teaser's, sticks, rocks, are preffilably Availble even rubber bullets.


No, we don't live in the wild west, but you presumeably do not live on the plateau of Tennessee either. Guns are a NEED in some people's lives. Try protecting a herd of calves from coyotes with rubber bullets or your bare hands! Try keeping the varmints out of your feed stock while maintaining an active farm. We don't have indians knocking at our doors today, but in my area we do have meth addicts robbing people for small amounts to get their materials for their "high". We also have just "plum sorry" people that are going to harm others no matter what.

Everyone in my area almost owns a gun...several. Oddly enough, crimes (especially gun crimes) are VERY low. What few robberies that are attempted normally get stopped and no one is hurt...many teenagers get a "second" chance due to gun owners around here. We catch them, stop them before they do something REALLY stupid, and turn them over to programs to clean up their act.

I'm sure you all could go against me with other horror stories of your own, but until you've been in a field with no trees and had a rabid coyote after you, you'll never know the benefit of having a handy gun at your convenience!

Respectfully submitted by this old country gal of course :rolleyes:

[Bullet]

visit www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars or wonder.cdc.gov. Accidental death statistics from 1903 forward are available from the National Safety Council.

Firearm-related deaths have decreased every year since 1993. Overall, they have decreased 49% since 1993.

Firearm accident deaths have been decreasing for decades. Since 1930, the annual number of firearm accident deaths has decreased 76%, while the U.S. population has more than doubled and the number of guns has quintupled. Among children, such deaths have decreased 84% since 1975.

Firearm accident deaths are at an all-time low, among the entire U.S. population and among children. In 2000, there were 776 firearm accident deaths, including 86 among children.

The firearm accident death rate is at an all-time low -- 0.3 per 100,000 population. It has declined 92% since the all-time high in 1904.

Firearms are involved in only 1% of all deaths, and in only 1% of deaths among children.

Firearms are involved in only 0.8% of accidental deaths. Most accidental deaths involve, or are due to, motor vehicles (43%), falls (13%), poisoning (13%), suffocation (6%), drowning (3%), fires (3%), medical mistakes (3%), and environmental factors (2%). Among children, firearms are involved in only 1.5% of accidental deaths. Most accidental deaths among children involve, or are due to, motor vehicles (45%), drowning (16%), suffocation (14%), fires (10%), poisoning (1.6%), environmental factors (1.4%), falls (1.4%), and medical mistakes (1.2%).

Where are the activist and back yard pool control people? Why are we not banning cars when they kill 43 times the number of people than guns do? Isn't it ironic that doctors kill more people than guns do? :-5



I have 6 guns, and none of them have ever tried to kill me or anybody else. I am a responsible gun owner. I have a gun safe, and keep all of my guns locked when my kids are here. My safe is readilly accessible as safely as can be. I have also taught them gun safety, and they know how dangerous they are and that they are NOT toys. I also have a CCW and have carried for 8 years now. And I am happy to say I have never needed to use it. It has although given me peace of mind, which is priceless.



Jives you're right. You should not own a gun. It's not for everybody. The fact that drinking was involved pretty much emphasizes this point. As for people who go beer hunting, well it's just plain irresponsible.

[kmhowe72]

I heared that the older kid is now in the custody of his grandparent. I am all full of using othere methods of defense.

[greydeadhead]

kmhowe72 wrote: Still even if you think that the consitution has guns excatly in words in the constition. Let me put to you a different way. When the constition was written we(or them) were fighting a war against england. It didn't say we have the right to kill each othere with arms. It said we have the right to protect ourselves. Ok. That doesn't mean we have to use guns. THE WORD GUN WAS NEVER USED IN THE CONSTITION PERIOD!

That is an iference, meaning that's the assumed weapon to protect youselves. In these troubling times, were people are killing each othere left and write. You think it's wise not have some GUN controll. We don't live in times when Indians or revoultionarys knock at are front door.

I think the best way is just to be able to contain a person without the use of the gun. Teaser's, sticks, rocks, are preffilably Availble even rubber bullets.


Pullllleeezzzeeee.. this sounds like a lawyer talking spin-english.. the correct quote is the right to bear arms AKA the right to carry a firearm... okay. And there is many more laws today that limit the right to carry a weapon. I am sure that when this was written they didn't have to get a permit to own a weapon .. much less carry one.

[Bullet]

kmhowe72 wrote: Still even if you think that the consitution has guns excatly in words in the constition. Let me put to you a different way. When the constition was written we(or them) were fighting a war against england. It didn't say we have the right to kill each othere with arms. It said we have the right to protect ourselves. Ok. That doesn't mean we have to use guns. THE WORD GUN WAS NEVER USED IN THE CONSTITION PERIOD! You're right. I think they meant rocket launchers. They were readily available back then.. Duh.



That is an iference, meaning that's the assumed weapon to protect youselves. In these troubling times, were people are killing each othere left and write. You think it's wise not have some GUN controll. We don't live in times when Indians or revoultionarys knock at are front door. Again, you're right, no Indians, just dope dealers, muggers, rapists, crack heads, murderers, and anybody who thinks they have a right to your new stereo.



I think the best way is just to be able to contain a person without the use of the gun. Teaser's, sticks, rocks, are preffilably Availble even rubber bullets. Sheer genius. Why did'nt I think of that, oh that's right, because it's ill-concieved, impractical, and a recipe for getting yourself killed. Never NEVER bring a knife to a gun fight. But if you want to use a rock while they are shooting REAL bullets at you, go ahead. Who said nature did not have a way to weed out the imbicels?



As for your teasers, what kind of batteries does yours take and what good will it do? It will definitely distract them for a second, while they laugh at you. My girlfriend has one, takes 2 AA batteries and has 6 speeds. Darn thing looks real too.

[lady cop]

No Grey, those Minutemen and the Redcoats were battling it out at Concord and Bunker Hill with hammers....and as far as "teasers" i wonder if vibrators are a class A weapon now?

[Bullet]

lady cop wrote: No Grey, those Minutemen and the Redcoats were battling it out at Concord and Bunker Hill with hammers....and as far as "teasers" i wonder if vibrators are a class A weapon now? :DI think they are more of a class X. ROTFLMAO

[Tombstone]

This is a great topic. I'm sure all of you are familiar with my stance.

Those who have concealed permits are the good guys. Usually, in most states, you have to have training to get one. This includes gun handling, proof of target proficiency, and a course in legal and deadly force issues.

The responsibility is huge - and so is the liability to carry a concealed weapon.

Gun control does not work by definition. Because scofflaws don't follow the law, the good and law-abiding folks are the ones who end up disarmed and vulnerable.

Gun violence makes me sick to my stomach. I do wish, however, that more law abiding people carried. The shooting in Wisconsin (at the church service) could have been mitigated. There wasn't anyone there who could stop him though - because they were all *forced to be disarmed by law.

Wisconsin, Kansas, Nebraska, and Illinois have no right to carry law. The tables are in the criminals favor in these states.

[Tombstone]

I hope you all don't mind. But here are some thoughts from some great thinkers *and a few of our forefathers who actually were involved with the US Constitution.

Call me crazy, but I give people like Samuel Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Washington a lot more credence than activist judges in 2005. (And if you don't like or believe what our Democratic Fathers said, then read on and see what Lenin and Stalin believed and accomplished.)



Second Ammendment

"The said constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."

--Samuel Adams



"Arms are the only true badges of liberty. The possession of arms is the distinction of a free man from a slave."

--Andrew Fletcher, (1698)



"Disarmed citizens encourage crime and violence. Armed citizens encourage criminals to find a safer line of work."

--Harry Browne



"Australia's ban on handguns did not stop a killer from shooting 54 people, 35 of them fatally, in a 1996 rampage in Tasmania: He resorted to rifles. ... Thinking (gun control) measures will prevent episodes of mass murder is like thinking you can reduce drunk driving by banning Budweiser. ... After the 1996 slaughter, the Australian government outlawed semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns. As part of the deal, it bought back 640,000 guns from their private owners. The result? In the first year of the new ban, the murder rate rose 3.2 percent and armed robberies were up 44 percent."

--Stephen Chapman



"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

--Jeff Cooper



"f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens."

--Alexander Hamilton,Federalist No. 29



"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins. --

--Sammy the Bull Gravano, Mafia informant,on gun control

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."

--Patrick Henry

"I will not seek the capitulation of firearm manufacturers through the use of asinine lawsuits or the doling out of taxpayer-funded government contracts. I regret that you feel either of these tactics to be worthwhile endeavors."

--Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."

--Thomas Jefferson

"None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important, but especially so at a moment when rights the most essential to our welfare have been violated."

--Thomas Jefferson

"To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

--Richard Henry Lee

"One man with a gun can control 100 without one. ... Make mass searches and hold executions for found arms."

--Vladimir I. Lenin

"The advantage of being armed...the Americans possess over the people of all other nations.... Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several Kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

--James Madison,Federalist No. 26

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."

--James Madison, Federalist #46

"Who would have guessed that the shots heard 'round the world 225 years ago would fall on deaf ears in a nation now more sympathetic to the gun-grabbing Redcoat than the gun-bearing rebel?"

--Michelle Malkin

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."

--George Mason

"Arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe and preserve order in the world as well as property."

--Thomas Paine

"One ironic legacy of the Clinton administration is the rearming of the American citizenry. Each time Clinton and his friends in Congress threaten another round of anti-gun regulations, the American people respond by stocking up...."

--Llewellyn Rockwell

"The Second Amendment, like the rest of the Bill of Rights, was meant to inhibit only the federal government, not the states. The framers, as The Federalist Papers attest (see No. 28), saw the state militias as forces that might be summoned into action against the federal government itself, if it became tyrannical."

--Joseph Sobran

"If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."

--Joseph Stalin

"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 by rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

--Justice Joseph Story, "Commentaries on the Constitution"

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

--Mao Tse-Tung

"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."

--Henry St. George Tucker, Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England," 1768

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the America people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."

--George Washington

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

--Noah Webster

[lady cop]

excellent treatise Tombstone!!!

[Jives]

BabyRider wrote: I believe that the reason for the "concealed" is that if anyone was allowed to walk around with a gun in plain sight, there is a possibility for panic.


Yeah, I thought the same thing. But here in New Mexico, probably 3 out of every 4 people are sporting guns and nobody seems to panic.

[Pearl Harbor]

Bothwell wrote:

I know it is in the constitution as the right to bear arms but I would love to know the statistics on how many citizens have actually managed to successfully defend themselves or their properties with a privately held weapon as opposed to the number of accidental shootings. Why did this woman think carrying a loaded gun around would make her more safe.




Research by Yale University Professor John R. Lott Jr., author of More Guns, Less Crime.

Lott says his research shows that guns used defensively stop about 2 million crimes a year, five times the amount of crimes in which guns are used.

Mr. Bothwell,

Just think of this number. About 2 million. This is generally agreed upon by many other crime statistic organizations. I don't know what you experience in the UK, but let's just say I've had to exhibit my iron a few times myself. I went from being a potentially dead victim to a living breathing free man. No shots were ever fired.

By fact that the criminals knew I could defend myself with extreme prejudice was enough for them to slink away and choose another victim.

[Jives]

Wow. did you have that already written somewhere, or did you just type it? It's a freakin' BOOK!

lol, I'm actually pro-gun, even though I don't own any myself. Just because I turn into an idiot around guns doesn't mean I'd like all the criminals to be the only ones with weapons.

Actually, it's been two decades since I sold all my guns...I'm thinking that now I'm probably responsible enough to own one again. Just a little .22 pistol (revolver..easier to use and clean)

I know LC will probably tell me that it doesn't have enough stopping power, but honestly, with my arthritus, anything larger and I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.

(or the barn side of a broad either.)

[lady cop]

Jives, despite the fact you are circling like a buzzard waiting for me to die :sneaky: , i would ask you what you want a weapon for? to what purpose? and you are right about what i would say, the only thing you're going to stop with a 22 revolver is a squirrel.(unless you shot point blank to the heart or in the ear).however, you need to be comfortable with whatever you choose. if you can pull the trigger on the 22 you can manage a 38.

[Jives]

Weellll...I thought it would be fun to slap on a holster and do some "quick draw" stuff with some tin cans. (I actually used to be pretty good at this, Hollywood style and everything!)

and there was an incident where a guy broke into my house and stole my guitar (Mrs. Ives was actually sleeping on the couch at the time!)

But I know what you're gonna say, "Do I actually want to shoot somebody?" Well....no.

The Air Force was right when they assigned me to be an instructor pilot. I probably could never kill somebody eye to eye. (Just teach other people to do it!)

[kmhowe72]

The sacasiam is not necessary unless your in grade school. So if we didn't have guns. driving: obody would be shooting you in the first place. i was joking about the rocks. :driving:

[Tombstone]

Jives wrote: Weellll...I thought it would be fun to slap on a holster and do some "quick draw" stuff with some tin cans. (I actually used to be pretty good at this, Hollywood style and everything!)

and there was an incident where a guy broke into my house and stole my guitar (Mrs. Ives was actually sleeping on the couch at the time!)

But I know what you're gonna say, "Do I actually want to shoot somebody?" Well....no.

The Air Force was right when they assigned me to be an instructor pilot. I probably could never kill somebody eye to eye. (Just teach other people to do it!)


Jives,

I really respect your self-awareness about this issue. Your hiatus from firearms was probably a good choice for you - and others!

Conventional wisdom says: .380 ACP and above in caliber for a defensive firearm. Do remember, however, that the CIA's choice caliber for assassination is a .22.

All I know is, I would never want to be looking down a barrel of any gun. (My hat is off to Lady Cop! Who faces this nastiness regularly.)

A couple of women I met at the range carry (legally) .22 semi's. They can shoot like the dickens and can put out 6 rounds faster than you can count to 1.5. I would much rather meet some of the macho guys with their .45 acp's (who have a hard time grouping inside of 20 inches past 10 yards) than these women who can pepper a target well past 75 feet.

But I agree with LC, if you really don't need one - no need to get one. But, .22's are fun to plink with and are easy on the pocketbook when buying ammo.

[Bullet]

kmhowe72 wrote: The sacasiam is not necessary unless your in grade school. So if we didn't have guns. driving: obody would be shooting you in the first place. i was joking about the rocks. :driving:You don't know me too well do you. I am sarcasm incarnate. Or as you say it..sacasiam.

And besides, for all you know, I might be in grade school.

And if we did not have guns, we'd all be speaking German right now.

As for joking about the rocks....well those guys wearing towels (PLO) have been throwing them at the Isreali's tanks for decades. For all I know, you might be serious. (ducking) BTW, you don't live in a glass house do you?

I mean no harm, just having fun. (re-loading)

You never answered me about your teaser. I am oh so curious. (insert sarcasm, er sacasiam, here)

[lady cop]

Whoo Tombstone, there's a big consideration if you're going to use the range a lot! the cost of ammo. my Speer gold dot hollow points are $30. per box of 50. i'll buy cheaper for the range, but NEVER reloads. and the CIA assassination choice of a 22, that is assuming a double tap at point blank. i doubt that's what agents are wearing in their sam brownes.

[lady cop]

kmhowe72 wrote: driving: obody would be shooting you in the first place. :driving: what does this mean?

[BabyRider]

kmhowe72 wrote: The sacasiam is not necessary unless your in grade school. So if we didn't have guns. driving: obody would be shooting you in the first place. i was joking about the rocks. :driving:
Someone please move this to the "Spelling and Grammar" thread.

And....WTF does it MEAN???

[Bullet]

lady cop wrote: Whoo Tombstone, there's a big consideration if you're going to use the range a lot! the cost of ammo. my Speer gold dot hollow points are $30. per box of 50. i'll buy cheaper for the range, but NEVER reloads. and the CIA assassination choice of a 22, that is assuming a double tap at point blank. i doubt that's what agents are wearing in their sam brownes. :DI pack a 9mm semi with Exreme Shock anti-terrorist rounds, 2 back up mags, and a 22Mag mini revolver 5 shot with hollow points. What do you pack off duty LC?

[BabyRider]

kmhowe72 wrote: The constitition allows you to bear weapons . It doesn't say BARE GUNSActually the Constitution says the right to "bear arms." So, seriously...what type of arms, or weapons do YOU think they meant???

[Tombstone]

lady cop wrote: Whoo Tombstone, there's a big consideration if you're going to use the range a lot! the cost of ammo. my Speer gold dot hollow points are $30. per box of 50. i'll buy cheaper for the range, but NEVER reloads.


Yes, Speer gold dot is great ammo. Not something I'd want to shoot at the range too much. Cha-ching! So it sounds like you carry a 9 mm?

Do you have an interest in competition shooting? Others in your department?

We use Wolf (Russian made) ammo at the range. We buy in quantity and have it shipped to us. Just ball rounds. It's a good choice for the range because it's full metal (bi-metal) jacket steel case. It's also Berdan primed so you can't reload - but the price is so good that doesn't matter too much.



and the CIA assassination choice of a 22, that is assuming a double tap at point blank. i doubt that's what agents are wearing in their sam brownes.


Yes, good point! I wouldn't know about the firing procedure. It's been documented over the years that the little .22 was the bullet of choice. I'm sure things are changing now - what with microwave and pulse weapons.

[BabyRider]

Bullet wrote: I pack a 9mm semi with Exreme Shock anti-terrorist rounds, 2 back up mags, and a 22Mag mini revolver 5 shot with hollow points.


A well-armed biker...just tugs at my heart strings...:-4

[Bullet]

BabyRider wrote: Someone please move this to the "Spelling and Grammar" thread.

And....WTF does it MEAN??? ROTFLMAO.....I are nut a much gooder spiller, butt my ghoulfiend heps me a lot. (Lobbing crap grenade. Running for cover)

[lady cop]

Bullet wrote: I pack a 9mm semi with Exreme Shock anti-terrorist rounds, 2 back up mags, and a 22Mag mini revolver 5 shot with hollow points. What do you pack off duty LC? duty weapon, HK 45. off duty S&W 9mm. i hate the HK. i hate plastic guns. my all-steel 9 mm weighs more than the 45. we always have 3 full magazines.

[Bullet]

BabyRider wrote:

A well-armed biker...just tugs at my heart strings...:-4Hey little girl...want some candy???

[Tombstone]

Bullet wrote: I pack a 9mm semi with Exreme Shock anti-terrorist rounds, 2 back up mags, and a 22Mag mini revolver 5 shot with hollow points. What do you pack off duty LC?


Hmmm...a 22 Mag mini revolver. That sounds like a nice little gun. I've always been impressed with the .22 mag cartridge.

[lady cop]

BabyRider wrote: Actually the Constitution says the right to "bear arms." So, seriously...what type of arms, or weapons do YOU think they meant??? Babyrider...if you go back to the beginning you will see...hammers and crossbows.