Remind Us how Obama does not want our firearms.

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I fully know what written language means.Most of it, like your original post, nothing but pure conjecture and misleading.
It really isn't difficult to figure out.
But you still dodged the question, now didn't you, speaking of "words."
Name the laws that have been passed and the limits on gun restrictions that have been passed or implemented during the tenure of President Obama.
Then, tell us how many guns/rifles, you have had to forfeit.
With clarity and certainty.

How many have been confiscated and what new restrictions have been put in place.?
Answer the question. Don't dodge it.

How many of your guns has Obama confiscated so far?

You and your buddies insist he has no intention to push for more strict laws on firearms. this article proves you are wrong.

Nothing to dodge he ANNOUNCED he wants to create more restrictions and that he WANTS to ban certain types of firearms. what part of that is so hard for you to understand? Are you unable to read English? Perhaps you never learned how to understand what the written word means?

You are an idiot. The claim I made was he wants... He announced he plans to SEEK more laws and to ban certain types of firearms. What part of that do you have a problem with? Are you just to stupid to understand?

Actually you're the idiot, as well as being a liar.

At no time has the president advocated that guns be 'confiscated,' or that he 'wants or guns,' per your lie in your OP.

And none of the gun laws the president advocates have been ruled in violation of the Second Amendment by the Supreme Court.

Indeed, the president himself concedes such gun laws will never come to pass; presidents are at liberty to express their opinions on the issues of the day like any other American – but it's true partisan idiocy to seek to propagate the lie that Obama 'wants our guns.'

 

[francoHFW]

Yup, felons and crazies don't need background checks lol...

 

[charwin95]

Sooo...for 2013 there were only 505 accidental gun deaths....and children...of an age that we actually consider them children and not gang members......would be under 100 each year......

And on average Americans use guns 2 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives...so some subset of that is against home invasions....

of course, something tells me you won't be going to your gun store on the facts I presented......as an anti gunner you can't be trusted anyway.....

I read a lot of these accidental shootings but an average of 2 millions a year is hard to believe.
Like California where home invasion are rampant.... So far non of these home invasion victims were able to pull their guns to stop an intruder. Please educate me where the 2 millions came from.

 

[boilermaker55]

You have a real hard time explaining yourself when someone points out the flaws in the statements you make. Then what do you do. Insult.
Seems you wear the hat and coat of the idiot.
And you still refuse to answer the question. WHY? You know you have to say something truthful...No, on second thought that might be do difficult for you.
Have a nice day.

I fully know what written language means.Most of it, like your original post, nothing but pure conjecture and misleading.
It really isn't difficult to figure out.
But you still dodged the question, now didn't you, speaking of "words."
Name the laws that have been passed and the limits on gun restrictions that have been passed or implemented during the tenure of President Obama.
Then, tell us how many guns/rifles, you have had to forfeit.
With clarity and certainty.

How many have been confiscated and what new restrictions have been put in place.?
Answer the question. Don't dodge it.

How many of your guns has Obama confiscated so far?

You and your buddies insist he has no intention to push for more strict laws on firearms. this article proves you are wrong.

Nothing to dodge he ANNOUNCED he wants to create more restrictions and that he WANTS to ban certain types of firearms. what part of that is so hard for you to understand? Are you unable to read English? Perhaps you never learned how to understand what the written word means?

You are an idiot. The claim I made was he wants... He announced he plans to SEEK more laws and to ban certain types of firearms. What part of that do you have a problem with? Are you just to stupid to understand?

 

[2aguy]

Sooo...for 2013 there were only 505 accidental gun deaths....and children...of an age that we actually consider them children and not gang members......would be under 100 each year......

And on average Americans use guns 2 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives...so some subset of that is against home invasions....

of course, something tells me you won't be going to your gun store on the facts I presented......as an anti gunner you can't be trusted anyway.....

I read a lot of these accidental shootings but an average of 2 millions a year is hard to believe.
Like California where home invasion are rampant.... So far non of these home invasion victims were able to pull their guns to stop an intruder. Please educate me where the 2 millions came from.

That is the average number from 10 studies of non military, non police gun self defense studies over a 40 year period....of the studies I usually post a list of, not one study puts the number at below 764,000 each year....so even if we take that lowest number, that far outwieghs any accidental gun deaths...

And keep in mind...as more Americans own and carry guns, more than 12.8 million people in America now carry guns for self defense, the gun murder rate, and the accidental gun death rate have been going down.

That disproves the beliefs of anti gunnners who have always claimed that more Americans with more guns would lead to more gun crime and more accidents...those numbers are easy to see from the CDC and the FBI.....

So anyway you look at it.....guns don't increase the gun murder rate or the gun accident rate, and they stop on average 2 million violent crimes a year.

 

[2aguy]

Sooo...for 2013 there were only 505 accidental gun deaths....and children...of an age that we actually consider them children and not gang members......would be under 100 each year......

And on average Americans use guns 2 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives...so some subset of that is against home invasions....

of course, something tells me you won't be going to your gun store on the facts I presented......as an anti gunner you can't be trusted anyway.....

I read a lot of these accidental shootings but an average of 2 millions a year is hard to believe.
Like California where home invasion are rampant.... So far non of these home invasion victims were able to pull their guns to stop an intruder. Please educate me where the 2 millions came from.

And here is the information I used to come up with that number...also, I now include the studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape..that is at the bottom.....

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...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

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
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)....

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

And here we have studies that show that guns are the most effective way to stop a rape.....


Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and more likely to not be injured during the attack....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

********************

So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....

***********************

http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/

And for 19.95 you can read Southwick's 2000 study on guns that talk about rape.....

Self-defense with guns The consequences

This one gives the actual percentages of how rapes are stopped...guns come out on top...

http://medind.nic.in/jal/t07/i4/jalt07i4p99.pdf

 

[2aguy]

Sooo...for 2013 there were only 505 accidental gun deaths....and children...of an age that we actually consider them children and not gang members......would be under 100 each year......

And on average Americans use guns 2 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives...so some subset of that is against home invasions....

of course, something tells me you won't be going to your gun store on the facts I presented......as an anti gunner you can't be trusted anyway.....

I read a lot of these accidental shootings but an average of 2 millions a year is hard to believe.
Like California where home invasion are rampant.... So far non of these home invasion victims were able to pull their guns to stop an intruder. Please educate me where the 2 millions came from.

here are some actual results from what I posted.....


http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/Crime/Florida/Gun Ownership Stops Rape/

In Orlando, Florida, in 1966 a series of brutal rapes swept the
community. Citizens reacted to the tripling in the rate of rape
over the previous year by buying handguns for self-defense; 200-300
firearms were being purchased each week from dealers, and an unknown
number more from private parties. The newspaper there, the _Orlando
Sentinel Star_, had an anti-gun editorial stance and tried to pressure
the local police chief and city government to stop the flow of arms.

When that tactic failed, the paper decided that in the interest of
public safety, they would sponsor a gun-training seminar in conjunction
with the local police. Plans were made for a one-day training course at
a local city park.

Plans were made for an expected 400-500 women. However,
more than 2500 women arrived, and brought with them every conceivable
kind of firearm. They had to park many blocks away, and the weapons
were carried in in purses, paper bags, boxes, briefcases, holsters,
and womens' hands. One police officer present said he'd never been so
scared in his life. [It must have been quite a sight! ]

Swamped, the organizers hastily dismissed the women with promises for
a more thorough course with scheduled appointments. The course offered
was for three classes/week, and within 6 months, the Orlando police had
trained more than 6000 women in basic pistol marksmanship and the law
of self-defense.

The results?

In 1966 there were 36 rapes in Orlando, triple the 1965 rate. In 1967,
there were 4.

Before the training, rape rates had been increasing in
Orlando as nationwide.

5 years after the training, rape was still
below pre-training levels in Orlando, but up 308% in the surrounding
areas, 96% for Florida overall, and 64% nationally.

Also in 1967, violent assault and burglary decreased by 25% in Orlando,
in addition to the rape reductions.

In 1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD FIRED HER WEAPON in self-defense. In
1967, NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD TURNED HER GUN ON HER HUSBAND OR BOYFRIEND.
(No data are available for later years.)

The reason the program worked so spectacularly well is that it was
widely known that Orlando women had the means and training to defend
themselves from attackers. Rapists, being (somewhat) human, they are
learning engines; they took their business elsewhere--to the detriment
of the defenseless in those other locations.

Department of Justice victim studies show that overall, when rape is
attempted, the completion rate is 36%. But when a woman defends herself
with a gun, the completion rate drops to 3%.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So right to a gun has to have limitations too.

Tell us: What limitations are inherent to the right to arms?

Now to have loopholes in background checks is the same as having no background checks.

False.
There is no way to legally get around a background check when buying a gun rom a dealer, so there is no loophole.

What limitations are inherent to the right to arms?
Convicted Felon, Mentally Ill

Not so -- this was not the case until 1968, and then only because a law was created to that effect
So, what limitations are inherent to the right?

Now to have loopholes in background checks is the same as having no background checks.

There is no loophole - it is impossible to legally get around a background check when buying a gun from a dealer.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You do know that child pornography and defamation harm other people, right? Me owning a gun does not harm other people. Me going on a killing spree with it obviously does, but last I checked that was already illegal.

Um yeah and strict background helps keep guns out of dangerous criminals. Is that really so invasive?

Um yeah and strict background helps keep guns out of dangerous criminals.

Nothing keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, if they want them.

No one ever said any law is perfect. Obviously we are better off with such laws.

How are we better off with laws that restrict the rights of the law abiding with the purpose to prevent certain people from getting guns that, in reality, do not prevent those people from getting guns?

Yes there are flaws. Let's fix them. Republicans prevent this.

OK.... offer a fix that prevents criminals from getting guns that does not further restrict the right to arms.

You people need to learn to compromise.

OK... what do you have to offer we law-abiding gun owners in exchange for us allowing our rights to be further limited?

 

[M14 Shooter]

7 years since his election- 7 years of predictions that Obama will be seizing your guns.
7 years of gullible and paranoid gun enthusiasts making gun manufacturers wealthy
And 7 years without guns being seized.

Because.... he hasn't had the political power to enact his anti-gun agenda, even when the Dems held Congress..
If he had the political power to enact that agenda, there's no argument that he would not.

'there's no argument that he would not'
Despite any evidence that he wants to take your guns away from you.

The Obama openly wants to ban rifles, pistols and shotguns.
Why has he not?
He hasn't had the political power to enact his anti-gun agenda, even when the Dems held Congress..
If he had the political power to enact that agenda, there's no question in any reasonable mind that he would have.
And so, your "point" here really means nothing.

Got any proof to that?

As you asked me....
Do you know how to Google?
obama ban assault weapons - Google Search

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why are their laws against owning fully auto .50 caliber machine guns then?

M2HB? Legal. Expensive,. But legal.

And why don't criminals have them?

They have no use for a weapon that is almost 6 feet long and weighs >100lbs.

The gun hugger arguments are ridiculous. "Why have laws, they don't protect anyone"?

An order of magnitude less ridiculous than thinking you can enact a law that will prevent people from breaking the law.

Well then why do we have any laws at all.

To prosecute people when they do something they aren't supposed to do.

Gun lickers have an irrational fear of life and a gun seems to be the only pacifier that feels comfortable in their mouth.

Thank you for helping to prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

You are so self-deluded.

Says he who offered no meaningful response to a post that directly addressed yours.
You argue emotion, ignorance and/or dishonest, in your every post.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A prohibited person may not be able to 'legally' obtain a firearm, but there's nothing in the law preventing him from in fact doing so when buying from a private seller.

That's because it is impossible to enaact law that will prevent people from breaking the law.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Again, no reason for discussion on this here, the gun licking side is not rational. But you arrrre angry and scared. Carry on.

Says he who only argues from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Liberals understand the loopholes gun dealers and manufacturers use to flood the black market with guns.

No such loophole exists.
You are either ignorant of this fact or arguing from dishonesty.

 

[evince]

killing your fellow Americans is not the answer evil ones

 

[2aguy]

killing your fellow Americans is not the answer evil ones

I don't think a lot of criminals and mass shooters post here...except perhaps for that guy in Louisiana......

Have you tried taking that message into the democrat controlled inner cities where all the killing is taking place...they are giving our country a bad name....if the gangs created by democrat policies would stop shooting people, we would have a much lower gun murder rate.....