In light of the attacks in Paris...shall we discuss gun control?

[Brain357]

Google Oregon Mall shooter. Guns are used about 2 million times a year for defensive purposes, in most cases a shot is never fired. A bad guy just knowing you're armed will usually send them scurrying for safer ground, because they are basically cowards.

Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

OK Texas, I looked up your Oregon Mall shooter. The citizen never shot (probably for good reason). The reason the shooter commited suicide was most likely that his gun was jammed when the police arrived. One questionable incident from three years ago is all you've got? That's actually sad. It's certainly not enough to convince me that arming more citizens will stop the violence.

If his gun jammed how did he commit suicide…..the concealed carrier was there first, not the police.

[

Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

OK Texas, I looked up your Oregon Mall shooter. The citizen never shot (probably for good reason). The reason the shooter commited suicide was most likely that his gun was jammed when the police arrived. One questionable incident from three years ago is all you've got? That's actually sad. It's certainly not enough to convince me that arming more citizens will stop the violence.

And here is the Oregon Mall shooter……

8. Clackamas Town Center Mall


Dec. 11, 2012
Two people were killed and a third was seriously wounded at Clackamas Town Center near Portland, Oregon when a rifle-toting gunman opened fire in in the busy food court. Nick Meli, a shopper in the mall, drew a personally owned firearm on the gunman, who immediately retreated to a service corridor and killed himself. Meli did not fire his weapon for fear of striking bystanders yet authorities say his actions caused the gunman to cease his attack and end his own life.

[/QUOTE]

2aGuy, thank you for the list of 12. Enlightening.

I am alarmed by what a lot of violent nut jobs we are creating in America, and I would very much like to see that stop, as probably everyone on this message board would. Gun control or even gun abolishment won't be the whole answer. If it is the only solution we try, it is not going to work. But some of us believe that weapons ownership in this country has gotten a bit out of hand.[/QUOTE]

You better check those with another source. Most of that list aren't really stopping mass shootings.[/QUOTE]

This example it sounds more like he dropped all his magazines and couldn't load his ar and then committed suicide to me. Great example for mag limits.

At this point, hundreds of people fled the mall after hearing the gunshots, but many remained inside and dashed to cover. Roberts headed further toward the food court, firing at 16-year-old employee Alina Pavlenko, who was over 100 feet away, but missed. He also dropped three other magazines in his possession.[1] He then turned back and headed toward a JCPenney store. He attempted to reload the AR-15 at that point, but was unable to do so, the weapon having apparently jammed. During that time, Nick Meli, a concealed carry permit holder, drew his Glock 22, claimed to have taken aim at Roberts, but did not fire since there was a bystander behind Roberts. Meli claims that Roberts saw him and that this may have contributed to Roberts' decision to commit suicide.[7]

 

[thanatos144]

No citizen needs AR-15's and AK-47's that hold dozens of bullets without reloading. Nor do we need flame throwers and grenade launchers. They were developed for the military to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time, and they are legal in much of the US. AR-15's were used in the Newtown slaughter and the Aurora shooting, legally procured. They did what they were designed to do--kill lots of people in a very short time. AK-47's are in such high demand, we've started producing them in the US since the Russian model was banned. That was bin-Laden's favorite.
Someone will no doubt start spouting a bunch of numbers at me, but as much as I want to understand both sides of this issue, these type of guns seem to be just plain 'overkill.' (pardon the pun).

Dummy our second amendment is protection from the government and it'd military. ... so why don't we need ar 15s which truthfully I have better hunting rifles

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[thanatos144]

Progressives hate the idea of a innocent killing thier jew killing terrorist heroes

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Iceweasel]

No citizen needs AR-15's and AK-47's that hold dozens of bullets without reloading.

Nobody needs another asshole, yet here you are.

 

[kaz]

Whenever a point is made, you just make a poor attempt to move the goalposts

An honest comparison is moving the goal posts? I said based on use from the very start.

That isn't an accurate comparison…and even doing that….people using guns according to design accidentally kill 505 people.

People driving cars according to design kill over 35,000……

If you could use a gun to get to work it would be safer…..

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

I don't? 2aguy has provided it to you repeatedly

 

[Brain357]

An honest comparison is moving the goal posts? I said based on use from the very start.

That isn't an accurate comparison…and even doing that….people using guns according to design accidentally kill 505 people.

People driving cars according to design kill over 35,000……

If you could use a gun to get to work it would be safer…..

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

I don't? 2aguy has provided it to you repeatedly

Yes and the numbers are a joke. He claims more defensed than there are crimes committed. And that still doesn't mean any lives are saved. Fact is there are almost no reported defenses and those are the only ones you can count.

 

[kaz]

That isn't an accurate comparison…and even doing that….people using guns according to design accidentally kill 505 people.

People driving cars according to design kill over 35,000……

If you could use a gun to get to work it would be safer…..

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

I don't? 2aguy has provided it to you repeatedly

Yes and the numbers are a joke. He claims more defensed than there are crimes committed. And that still doesn't mean any lives are saved. Fact is there are almost no reported defenses and those are the only ones you can count.

You scoured the DNC website and liberals blogs and found no support at all, did you? I see your point, obviously a gun is no defense for a criminal, you are too keen to see through that thinly veiled shroud

 

[Brain357]

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

I don't? 2aguy has provided it to you repeatedly

Yes and the numbers are a joke. He claims more defensed than there are crimes committed. And that still doesn't mean any lives are saved. Fact is there are almost no reported defenses and those are the only ones you can count.

You scoured the DNC website and liberals blogs and found no support at all, did you? I see your point, obviously a gun is no defense for a criminal, you are too keen to see through that thinly veiled shroud

The numbers are greatly exaggerated however lawful defenses do happen.

 

[2aguy]

yeah...because the gun owner stopped them before they murdered enough people to qualify......would you prefer they waited till they shot and killed 4 people( the old definition) and then stopped them?

Last time I read through the list I recall many were done by the time the armed hero showed up. Like the first one the kid was in his car leaving I believe. When reading things from gun sources it's important to compare their claims to real sources.

You missed the point that the kid was going on to another location to kill more people when the armed citizen stopped him….that is the point…no armed citizen and the killer moves on and kills more people…..

Stopping the mass shooting is the whole point of having armed citizens…you don't get to say…gee, the armed citizen stopped the guy at only 3 victims, therefore he didn't stop a mass shooting…..nice try though...

 

[2aguy]

No citizen needs AR-15's and AK-47's that hold dozens of bullets without reloading. Nor do we need flame throwers and grenade launchers. They were developed for the military to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time, and they are legal in much of the US. AR-15's were used in the Newtown slaughter and the Aurora shooting, legally procured. They did what they were designed to do--kill lots of people in a very short time. AK-47's are in such high demand, we've started producing them in the US since the Russian model was banned. That was bin-Laden's favorite.
Someone will no doubt start spouting a bunch of numbers at me, but as much as I want to understand both sides of this issue, these type of guns seem to be just plain 'overkill.' (pardon the pun).

Do you realize that knives, blunt objects and empty hands have killed far more people in this country than AR-15s have…..I can get the number from FBI table 8 but so can you…..

Those type of guns are used by our employees..the police and military….we employ them, we equip them….and as history has shown, only unarmed populations are victims of genocide and mass murder…so any rifle the police or military uses is exactly the weapon the civilians get to have as well….it keeps genocide, mass murder and ethnic cleansing as nothing more than a bad idea….

And do you realize that in Sandy Hook and Aurora, they could have killed just as many people with shotguns and pistols….they were drawn to those weapons because of video games and press coverage….

AR-15s are not military weapons….military weapons have select fire capability….and other rifles could easily be substituted for the AR…..as well…..

The biggest thing about Sandy Hook and Aurora….they were both gun free zones……no one besides the killer was allowed to have a gun in the zone….and that is why there were so many people killed….we saw that in France as well…..

Sandy Hook…the killer also attended the middle school and the high school….but only the elementary school did not have an armed resource officer…

Aurora…the killer had intended on going and shooting up an airport…but decided against it because of the armed security…..so he chose a gun free movie theater instead….

Gun free zones are the problem, not AR-15s…

There are over 1 million AR-15s in private hands….less than a handful are ever used in any crime in any year…..they are not a problem.

 

[2aguy]

Whenever a point is made, you just make a poor attempt to move the goalposts

An honest comparison is moving the goal posts? I said based on use from the very start.

That isn't an accurate comparison…and even doing that….people using guns according to design accidentally kill 505 people.

People driving cars according to design kill over 35,000……

If you could use a gun to get to work it would be safer…..

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

Here is the basis for that claim…..40 years of actual research……

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton Department of Justice study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

 

[Brain357]

yeah...because the gun owner stopped them before they murdered enough people to qualify......would you prefer they waited till they shot and killed 4 people( the old definition) and then stopped them?

Last time I read through the list I recall many were done by the time the armed hero showed up. Like the first one the kid was in his car leaving I believe. When reading things from gun sources it's important to compare their claims to real sources.

You missed the point that the kid was going on to another location to kill more people when the armed citizen stopped him….that is the point…no armed citizen and the killer moves on and kills more people…..

Stopping the mass shooting is the whole point of having armed citizens…you don't get to say…gee, the armed citizen stopped the guy at only 3 victims, therefore he didn't stop a mass shooting…..nice try though...

How do you know what he was doing? Why didn't he stay there and keep shooting people? You guys make things up and claim victory.

 

[OldLady]

No citizen needs AR-15's and AK-47's that hold dozens of bullets without reloading. Nor do we need flame throwers and grenade launchers. They were developed for the military to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time, and they are legal in much of the US. AR-15's were used in the Newtown slaughter and the Aurora shooting, legally procured. They did what they were designed to do--kill lots of people in a very short time. AK-47's are in such high demand, we've started producing them in the US since the Russian model was banned. That was bin-Laden's favorite.
Someone will no doubt start spouting a bunch of numbers at me, but as much as I want to understand both sides of this issue, these type of guns seem to be just plain 'overkill.' (pardon the pun).

Do you realize that knives, blunt objects and empty hands have killed far more people in this country than AR-15s have…..I can get the number from FBI table 8 but so can you…..

Those type of guns are used by our employees..the police and military….we employ them, we equip them….and as history has shown, only unarmed populations are victims of genocide and mass murder…so any rifle the police or military uses is exactly the weapon the civilians get to have as well….it keeps genocide, mass murder and ethnic cleansing as nothing more than a bad idea….

And do you realize that in Sandy Hook and Aurora, they could have killed just as many people with shotguns and pistols….they were drawn to those weapons because of video games and press coverage….

AR-15s are not military weapons….military weapons have select fire capability….and other rifles could easily be substituted for the AR…..as well…..

The biggest thing about Sandy Hook and Aurora….they were both gun free zones……no one besides the killer was allowed to have a gun in the zone….and that is why there were so many people killed….we saw that in France as well…..

Sandy Hook…the killer also attended the middle school and the high school….but only the elementary school did not have an armed resource officer…

Aurora…the killer had intended on going and shooting up an airport…but decided against it because of the armed security…..so he chose a gun free movie theater instead….

Gun free zones are the problem, not AR-15s…

There are over 1 million AR-15s in private hands….less than a handful are ever used in any crime in any year…..they are not a problem.

 

[2aguy]

OK Texas, I looked up your Oregon Mall shooter. The citizen never shot (probably for good reason). The reason the shooter commited suicide was most likely that his gun was jammed when the police arrived. One questionable incident from three years ago is all you've got? That's actually sad. It's certainly not enough to convince me that arming more citizens will stop the violence.

If his gun jammed how did he commit suicide…..the concealed carrier was there first, not the police.

[

Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

OK Texas, I looked up your Oregon Mall shooter. The citizen never shot (probably for good reason). The reason the shooter commited suicide was most likely that his gun was jammed when the police arrived. One questionable incident from three years ago is all you've got? That's actually sad. It's certainly not enough to convince me that arming more citizens will stop the violence.

And here is the Oregon Mall shooter……

8. Clackamas Town Center Mall


Dec. 11, 2012
Two people were killed and a third was seriously wounded at Clackamas Town Center near Portland, Oregon when a rifle-toting gunman opened fire in in the busy food court. Nick Meli, a shopper in the mall, drew a personally owned firearm on the gunman, who immediately retreated to a service corridor and killed himself. Meli did not fire his weapon for fear of striking bystanders yet authorities say his actions caused the gunman to cease his attack and end his own life.

2aGuy, thank you for the list of 12. Enlightening.

I am alarmed by what a lot of violent nut jobs we are creating in America, and I would very much like to see that stop, as probably everyone on this message board would. Gun control or even gun abolishment won't be the whole answer. If it is the only solution we try, it is not going to work. But some of us believe that weapons ownership in this country has gotten a bit out of hand.[/QUOTE]

You better check those with another source. Most of that list aren't really stopping mass shootings.[/QUOTE]

This example it sounds more like he dropped all his magazines and couldn't load his ar and then committed suicide to me. Great example for mag limits.

At this point, hundreds of people fled the mall after hearing the gunshots, but many remained inside and dashed to cover. Roberts headed further toward the food court, firing at 16-year-old employee Alina Pavlenko, who was over 100 feet away, but missed. He also dropped three other magazines in his possession.[1] He then turned back and headed toward a JCPenney store. He attempted to reload the AR-15 at that point, but was unable to do so, the weapon having apparently jammed. During that time, Nick Meli, a concealed carry permit holder, drew his Glock 22, claimed to have taken aim at Roberts, but did not fire since there was a bystander behind Roberts. Meli claims that Roberts saw him and that this may have contributed to Roberts' decision to commit suicide.[7][/QUOTE]

A link to the article you are using would be nice….


No, not a great example for mag limits…considering he didn't know how to operate the weapon under pressure but still managed to get it working to commit suicide after Meli pointed the gun at him….

Notice the thing you try to ignore…..he stopped shooting at other people once Meli was seen……he was then under the pressure of someone targeting him and he stopped shooting and killed himself….

Hmmmm…France doesn't allow anyone to have any magazines…..at all…….how did that work out for the concert goers….?

 

[2aguy]

yeah...because the gun owner stopped them before they murdered enough people to qualify......would you prefer they waited till they shot and killed 4 people( the old definition) and then stopped them?

Last time I read through the list I recall many were done by the time the armed hero showed up. Like the first one the kid was in his car leaving I believe. When reading things from gun sources it's important to compare their claims to real sources.

You missed the point that the kid was going on to another location to kill more people when the armed citizen stopped him….that is the point…no armed citizen and the killer moves on and kills more people…..

Stopping the mass shooting is the whole point of having armed citizens…you don't get to say…gee, the armed citizen stopped the guy at only 3 victims, therefore he didn't stop a mass shooting…..nice try though...

How do you know what he was doing? Why didn't he stay there and keep shooting people? You guys make things up and claim victory.

He told the police he was going to go to another location……please..read the stories…..

 

[OldLady]

No citizen needs AR-15's and AK-47's that hold dozens of bullets without reloading. Nor do we need flame throwers and grenade launchers. They were developed for the military to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time, and they are legal in much of the US. AR-15's were used in the Newtown slaughter and the Aurora shooting, legally procured. They did what they were designed to do--kill lots of people in a very short time. AK-47's are in such high demand, we've started producing them in the US since the Russian model was banned. That was bin-Laden's favorite.
Someone will no doubt start spouting a bunch of numbers at me, but as much as I want to understand both sides of this issue, these type of guns seem to be just plain 'overkill.' (pardon the pun).

Do you realize that knives, blunt objects and empty hands have killed far more people in this country than AR-15s have…..I can get the number from FBI table 8 but so can you…..

Those type of guns are used by our employees..the police and military….we employ them, we equip them….and as history has shown, only unarmed populations are victims of genocide and mass murder…so any rifle the police or military uses is exactly the weapon the civilians get to have as well….it keeps genocide, mass murder and ethnic cleansing as nothing more than a bad idea….

And do you realize that in Sandy Hook and Aurora, they could have killed just as many people with shotguns and pistols….they were drawn to those weapons because of video games and press coverage….

AR-15s are not military weapons….military weapons have select fire capability….and other rifles could easily be substituted for the AR…..as well…..

The biggest thing about Sandy Hook and Aurora….they were both gun free zones……no one besides the killer was allowed to have a gun in the zone….and that is why there were so many people killed….we saw that in France as well…..

Sandy Hook…the killer also attended the middle school and the high school….but only the elementary school did not have an armed resource officer…

Aurora…the killer had intended on going and shooting up an airport…but decided against it because of the armed security…..so he chose a gun free movie theater instead….

Gun free zones are the problem, not AR-15s…

There are over 1 million AR-15s in private hands….less than a handful are ever used in any crime in any year…..they are not a problem.

 

[Brain357]

An honest comparison is moving the goal posts? I said based on use from the very start.

That isn't an accurate comparison…and even doing that….people using guns according to design accidentally kill 505 people.

People driving cars according to design kill over 35,000……

If you could use a gun to get to work it would be safer…..

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

Here is the basis for that claim…..40 years of actual research……

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton Department of Justice study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

Yes many poorly done, small surveys that are extrapolating from tiny numbers. They are so accurate they range from 700k to 3.6 million. Given we only have 1.5 million violent crimes each year the huge numbers are obviously wrong.

What we know is gun owners are a minority, a very small minority chooses to carry. We have like 14,000 murders each year. At most gun owners are saving the lives of some small percent of 14k.

 

[2aguy]

yeah...because the gun owner stopped them before they murdered enough people to qualify......would you prefer they waited till they shot and killed 4 people( the old definition) and then stopped them?

Last time I read through the list I recall many were done by the time the armed hero showed up. Like the first one the kid was in his car leaving I believe. When reading things from gun sources it's important to compare their claims to real sources.

You missed the point that the kid was going on to another location to kill more people when the armed citizen stopped him….that is the point…no armed citizen and the killer moves on and kills more people…..

Stopping the mass shooting is the whole point of having armed citizens…you don't get to say…gee, the armed citizen stopped the guy at only 3 victims, therefore he didn't stop a mass shooting…..nice try though...

How do you know what he was doing? Why didn't he stay there and keep shooting people? You guys make things up and claim victory.

A principal and his gun


The moment Myrick heard shots, he ran to his truck. He unlocked the door, removed his gun from its case, removed a round of bullets from another case, loaded the gun and went looking for the killer. "I've always kept a gun in the truck just in case something like this ever happened," said Myrick, who has since become Principal of Corinth High School, Corinth, Miss.

Woodham knew cops would arrive before too long, so he was all business, no play. No talk of Jesus, just shooting and reloading, shooting and reloading. He shot until he heard sirens, and then ran to his car.

His plan, authorities subsequently learned, was to drive to nearby Pearl Junior High School and shoot more kids before police could show up.

But Myrick foiled that plan. He saw the killer fleeing the campus and positioned himself to point a gun at the windshield. Woodham, seeing the gun pointed at his head, crashed the car. Myrick approached the killer and confronted him. "Here was this monster killing kids in my school, and the minute I put a gun to his head he was a kid again," Myrick said.

 

[Brain357]

If his gun jammed how did he commit suicide…..the concealed carrier was there first, not the police.

[

Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

OK Texas, I looked up your Oregon Mall shooter. The citizen never shot (probably for good reason). The reason the shooter commited suicide was most likely that his gun was jammed when the police arrived. One questionable incident from three years ago is all you've got? That's actually sad. It's certainly not enough to convince me that arming more citizens will stop the violence.

And here is the Oregon Mall shooter……

8. Clackamas Town Center Mall


Dec. 11, 2012
Two people were killed and a third was seriously wounded at Clackamas Town Center near Portland, Oregon when a rifle-toting gunman opened fire in in the busy food court. Nick Meli, a shopper in the mall, drew a personally owned firearm on the gunman, who immediately retreated to a service corridor and killed himself. Meli did not fire his weapon for fear of striking bystanders yet authorities say his actions caused the gunman to cease his attack and end his own life.

2aGuy, thank you for the list of 12. Enlightening.

I am alarmed by what a lot of violent nut jobs we are creating in America, and I would very much like to see that stop, as probably everyone on this message board would. Gun control or even gun abolishment won't be the whole answer. If it is the only solution we try, it is not going to work. But some of us believe that weapons ownership in this country has gotten a bit out of hand.

You better check those with another source. Most of that list aren't really stopping mass shootings.[/QUOTE]

This example it sounds more like he dropped all his magazines and couldn't load his ar and then committed suicide to me. Great example for mag limits.

At this point, hundreds of people fled the mall after hearing the gunshots, but many remained inside and dashed to cover. Roberts headed further toward the food court, firing at 16-year-old employee Alina Pavlenko, who was over 100 feet away, but missed. He also dropped three other magazines in his possession.[1] He then turned back and headed toward a JCPenney store. He attempted to reload the AR-15 at that point, but was unable to do so, the weapon having apparently jammed. During that time, Nick Meli, a concealed carry permit holder, drew his Glock 22, claimed to have taken aim at Roberts, but did not fire since there was a bystander behind Roberts. Meli claims that Roberts saw him and that this may have contributed to Roberts' decision to commit suicide.[7][/QUOTE]

A link to the article you are using would be nice….


No, not a great example for mag limits…considering he didn't know how to operate the weapon under pressure but still managed to get it working to commit suicide after Meli pointed the gun at him….

Notice the thing you try to ignore…..he stopped shooting at other people once Meli was seen……he was then under the pressure of someone targeting him and he stopped shooting and killed himself….

Hmmmm…France doesn't allow anyone to have any magazines…..at all…….how did that work out for the concert goers….?[/QUOTE]

Yes couldn't operate under pressure. Better he shots ten times before he can't reload than 30. Mag limits would save lives.

 

[2aguy]

That isn't an accurate comparison…and even doing that….people using guns according to design accidentally kill 505 people.

People driving cars according to design kill over 35,000……

If you could use a gun to get to work it would be safer…..

No because once you calculate that cars are used millions of times more than guns, the rate of accidents for guns is way higher than cars.

And when you add in that guns prevent way more people from being shot than are shot by them accidentally then your argument is deluged

But you have no real basis for that claim.

Here is the basis for that claim…..40 years of actual research……

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton Department of Justice study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

Yes many poorly done, small surveys that are extrapolating from tiny numbers. They are so accurate they range from 700k to 3.6 million. Given we only have 1.5 million violent crimes each year the huge numbers are obviously wrong.

What we know is gun owners are a minority, a very small minority chooses to carry. We have like 14,000 murders each year. At most gun owners are saving the lives of some small percent of 14k.

Yes….deny 40 years of actual research by professional researchers, many of them anti gun researchers, both economists and criminal justice researchers……and we have far more than 1.5 million crimes…….

We had 8,124 gun murders in 2014……

according to the two anti gun researchers bill clinton hired….1.5 million times a year…and you can see…..some research puts it at over 2 million times a year…

And saying the surveys "are poorly done" by pulling it out of your ass has no bearing on the reality of those studies……

How about this….get some money and do your own research if you know so much….