So what IS the best way to reduce or prevent mass shootings?

[2aguy]

Well..see...in life...some people are bad, some people are good, and the bad guys use things to do bad things...while good guys use them to protect themselves and other innocent people....

See, bad guys will use anything they can to hurt other people....including guns...so good guys use their guns to stop them...thereby saving lives.....

So were guns invented by the good guys or the bad guys?
That must be the important question to be answered for us to get to the bottom of this.

It doesn't matter really, in either case it was invented to save the life of the user....right?

Not if it was invented to take the life of someone else...no.

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

No. They broke the law by entering your home...you should really study these things....they committed murder...and yes, the gun did save the life of the user.....even though he was committing an evil act.

 

[Sally Vater]

just what is wrong with the rich getting richer poor mindless moron?'
dont you want to get richer?

I'm rich enough. I worked for the same company 41 years and retired to a brick house on the lake 22 years ago. I paid taxes on my income which in those days was fair. After Reagan the richest quit paying their share. That's when I stopped voting for Republicans. It would have been different if Reagan hadn't gone in debt for what he spent. The absolute effect of what he did....than George W. Bush did the same thing again, was borrow trillions of dollars from foreign banks and funnel it into the pockets of the rich in the form of tax cuts. If you can't see that you've got one helluva perception problem:

..........................Total U S Debt...........................

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)
09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)
09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)
09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Reagan went into debt because tip o'neal lied to him and the democrats wouldn't stop spending money......it isn't that the rich don't pay...it is the greedy politicians spend too much...always has been the problem.

Not to mention the far left made the Social Security trust fund part of the money they could spend..

Not to mention Obama and democrats took billions from Medicare to fund obamacare that citizens paid in over their working lives for retirement. Corrupt assholes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well..see...in life...some people are bad, some people are good, and the bad guys use things to do bad things...while good guys use them to protect themselves and other innocent people....

See, bad guys will use anything they can to hurt other people....including guns...so good guys use their guns to stop them...thereby saving lives.....

So were guns invented by the good guys or the bad guys?
That must be the important question to be answered for us to get to the bottom of this.

It doesn't matter really, in either case it was invented to save the life of the user....right?

Not if it was invented to take the life of someone else...no.

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

 

[idb]

So were guns invented by the good guys or the bad guys?
That must be the important question to be answered for us to get to the bottom of this.

It doesn't matter really, in either case it was invented to save the life of the user....right?

Not if it was invented to take the life of someone else...no.

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It doesn't matter really, in either case it was invented to save the life of the user....right?

Not if it was invented to take the life of someone else...no.

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

Why do you not recognize that you cannot claim self-defense when you initiate the engagement?

 

[Campbell]

Not if it was invented to take the life of someone else...no.

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

Well...if you really want to you can ignore police instructions, track down a teen ager, pick a fight with him then kill him and get away with it. If you don't believe it ask the piece of shit George Zimmerman....the guy who shot Treyvon Martin. That useless bastard has been in and out of trouble several times since that happened. He was a cop wannabe.

 

[Rustic]

1. Ban all automatic and semi-automatic long rifles and pistols.
2. Limit the number of rounds to six.
3. Make gun manufacturers liable for misuse of their products.
4. Tag and track all guns and bullets sold.
5. Perform extensive background checks on buyers. No felons, people with histories of abusing drugs and alcohol, people with mental problems can own guns.
6. Mandatory licensing after passing a test demonstrating that the potential buyer knows best practices.
7. Gun sales restricted to licensed dealers.
8. Restrict Concealed Carry permits to folks that can prove a need (Carrying lots of valuable items).
9. Complete ban on guns where large groups of people congregate.

i would like to pick apart every one of your idiotic proposals, but for now i will concentrate on just the most stupid one,
#3 Make gun manufacturers liable for misuse of their products.
then we need to make automobile makers liable, knife makers, ball bats, pens and pencils, scissors, medicines, poisons etc. in fact any thing that can be used as a potential weapon.

... and with a garden fork

Well no.

Unlike that list of products you provided, none are used for the specific purpose of killing human beings. Guns, however, are used to kill human beings.

Additionally, the manufacturers of the products you mention are liable in many cases if their product harms or kills a human being.

That unique property of a firearm adds a great deal of danger to the public. The "General Welfare" clause of the Constitution, includes keeping American citizens relatively safe, both from foreign and domestic threats.

We have a pretty big problem in this country with firearms. That would place the solution in either the public and/or private realms. Right now? Neither is doing much of anything and the current situation is entirely unacceptable.

So unless gun manufacturers enact some sort of protocol that minimizes the risk to human beings, they should be held responsible if their product does harm.

Simple enough.

Sure they should, if their product stands up on it's own and shoots somebody.

You anti-constitutionalists are looking for backdoor ways to eliminate guns; in this particular case, sue gun manufacturers out of business.

So next time you see one of your comrades tell us that the left is not for disarming America, remind them of what you think and how you feel so they can at least admit defeat.

What's "Anti-Constitutionalist" is the notion that a "Well Regulate Militia Necessary for the Defense of the State" means that any fucking idiot can own a gun.

You need look up context for the time...

 

[Rustic]

just what is wrong with the rich getting richer poor mindless moron?'
dont you want to get richer?

I'm rich enough. I worked for the same company 41 years and retired to a brick house on the lake 22 years ago. I paid taxes on my income which in those days was fair. After Reagan the richest quit paying their share. That's when I stopped voting for Republicans. It would have been different if Reagan hadn't gone in debt for what he spent. The absolute effect of what he did....than George W. Bush did the same thing again, was borrow trillions of dollars from foreign banks and funnel it into the pockets of the rich in the form of tax cuts. If you can't see that you've got one helluva perception problem:

..........................Total U S Debt...........................

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)
09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)
09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)
09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

The only reason politicians raise taxes is to line their own pockets...

 

[Rustic]

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

Well...if you really want to you can ignore police instructions, track down a teen ager, pick a fight with him then kill him and get away with it. If you don't believe it ask the piece of shit George Zimmerman....the guy who shot Treyvon Martin. That useless bastard has been in and out of trouble several times since that happened. He was a cop wannabe.

Go hide...

 

[FA_Q2]

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

Well...if you really want to you can ignore police instructions, track down a teen ager, pick a fight with him then kill him and get away with it. If you don't believe it ask the piece of shit George Zimmerman....the guy who shot Treyvon Martin. That useless bastard has been in and out of trouble several times since that happened. He was a cop wannabe.

Still denying the fact of that case I see.

Not surprised. Following talking points again even when they are utter fabrications.

 

[Stephanie]

this is what Obama and YOUR Federal Government came up with

snip:
New Obama czar will hunt 'right-wing' extremists
Americans seen as possibly more threatening than Islamic jihadists
Published: 6 hours ago
Hohmann About | Email | Archive


Just two weeks after it announced a plan to globalize local police departments through the “Strong Cities Network,” the Obama administration has added a new tool in its fight against “violent extremism.”

A new position within the Justice Department – yet to be filled – will focus on investigating lone-wolf domestic terrorists or “extremists.”

The person who heads this new effort will target extremists who plan mass shootings, hold racist, bigoted or anti-government views or see themselves as “sovereign citizens.”

ALL of it here:
Read more at New Obama czar will hunt ‘right-wing’ extremists

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And taking the life of another often saves the life of the user......so again, guns were created to save the life of the user......

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

Well...if you really want to you can ignore police instructions, track down a teen ager, pick a fight with him then kill him and get away with it. If you don't believe it ask the piece of shit George Zimmerman....the guy who shot Treyvon Martin. That useless bastard has been in and out of trouble several times since that happened. He was a cop wannabe.

Once again, learn the difference between being attacked and being the attacker.

Zimmerman was talking to police for a couple of minutes and hung up with them. That piece of garbage Martin was hiding between the houses waiting on Zimmerman. When Zimmerman walked by him, Martin attacked.

Zimmerman suffered several injuries including a back injury, two black eyes, a broken nose, and lacerations to the back of the head. Martin on the other hand sustained not even a superficial wound. This according to the autopsy report.

As a CCW holder in my state, I can tell you that in most places, the laws are pretty uniform. In our state (and Florida) the law reads "A licensed firearm carrier can use deadly force if they believe that they (or others) are in jeopardy of serious bodily harm or death."

Given the multiple injuries Zimmerman suffered, it's more than clear he had every reason to believe he was in jeopardy of just that: serious bodily harm or death. That's why he's a free man. I would have shot Martin too and I probably wouldn't have even been changed unless my attacker was black and it drew national attention.

 

[Campbell]

just what is wrong with the rich getting richer poor mindless moron?'
dont you want to get richer?

I'm rich enough. I worked for the same company 41 years and retired to a brick house on the lake 22 years ago. I paid taxes on my income which in those days was fair. After Reagan the richest quit paying their share. That's when I stopped voting for Republicans. It would have been different if Reagan hadn't gone in debt for what he spent. The absolute effect of what he did....than George W. Bush did the same thing again, was borrow trillions of dollars from foreign banks and funnel it into the pockets of the rich in the form of tax cuts. If you can't see that you've got one helluva perception problem:

..........................Total U S Debt...........................

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)
09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)
09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)
09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

The only reason politicians raise taxes is to line their own pockets...

So it was just a coincidence that when Reagan cut taxes he borrowed three trillion dollars to cover the shortfall and when Clinton raised them he left a balanced budget with surpluses forecast all the way to a paid off debt. Not to worry....the first thing George W. Bush did was to cut them in 2001 and again in 2003 and proceeded to double the national debt:

..........................Total U S Debt...........................

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)
09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)
09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)
09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

 

[Campbell]

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

Well...if you really want to you can ignore police instructions, track down a teen ager, pick a fight with him then kill him and get away with it. If you don't believe it ask the piece of shit George Zimmerman....the guy who shot Treyvon Martin. That useless bastard has been in and out of trouble several times since that happened. He was a cop wannabe.

Once again, learn the difference between being attacked and being the attacker.

Zimmerman was talking to police for a couple of minutes and hung up with them. That piece of garbage Martin was hiding between the houses waiting on Zimmerman. When Zimmerman walked by him, Martin attacked.

Zimmerman suffered several injuries including a back injury, two black eyes, a broken nose, and lacerations to the back of the head. Martin on the other hand sustained not even a superficial wound. This according to the autopsy report.

As a CCW holder in my state, I can tell you that in most places, the laws are pretty uniform. In our state (and Florida) the law reads "A licensed firearm carrier can use deadly force if they believe that they (or others) are in jeopardy of serious bodily harm or death."

Given the multiple injuries Zimmerman suffered, it's more than clear he had every reason to believe he was in jeopardy of just that: serious bodily harm or death. That's why he's a free man. I would have shot Martin too and I probably wouldn't have even been changed unless my attacker was black and it drew national attention.

That's a goddamned boldfaced lie and you sir are a goddamned boldfaced liar!! It was a teen aged boy wearing a hoodie eating skittles. He was in the neighborhood visiting his father. The people around Sanford, FL are among the most racially prejudiced people in the world. I've been there numerous times in my life, I know. You people should be looking directly at folks like me when you tell lies like that. I would knock some of that bullshit out of you!!

 

[JoeB131]

i would like to pick apart every one of your idiotic proposals, but for now i will concentrate on just the most stupid one,
#3 Make gun manufacturers liable for misuse of their products.
then we need to make automobile makers liable, knife makers, ball bats, pens and pencils, scissors, medicines, poisons etc. in fact any thing that can be used as a potential weapon.

There's a difference between POTENTIAL weapons and things that are actually DESIGNED to be weapons.

And when the gun manufacturers use ads like THIS,

they are being manifestly irresponsible in the marketing their products to people who shouldn't have them.

 

[JoeB131]

90% of shooters already have one prior conviction….and as the Chicago police commissioner says, a criminal caught in an illegal possession of a gun is a gate way crime to eventually committing murder….

If only the gun grabbers would focus on the sociopaths who are using guns to commit crimes and leave the other 99% of the normal gun owning population alone….we wouldn't have the problem with guns that we have….but when they focus on normal gun owners…and ignore the actual shooters…it is not a surprise we have more gun crime.

we have too many guns. That's why we have gun crimes. We have too many people thinking guns make up for a tiny dick. That's why we have gun crimes.

Countries that don't let citizens have guns- DON'T HAVE GUN CRIMES.

It's pretty fucking simple.

 

[JoeB131]

Guns aren't the issue…fatherless boys are the issue.

You think there aren't just as many fatherless boys in the UK and Germany?

The low crime rate, excluding muslim terrorism is explained not by a lack of guns…but by the demographics…the majority of the population are Jewish, religious Jews make up a huge percent of the population and the muslims living inside Israel itself are obviously more law abiding than those who live surrounding Israel….so again, every Jewish citizen could carry a gun and their crime rate would still be low…because they are not criminals.

You mean other than engaging in genocide against the Palestinian people and running over peace activists with bulldozers, the Zionist Scum are totally not criminals...

But here's the thing. The Zionists don't let anyone but the Army and Police have guns. They certainly don't want the people they stole the land from having them.

 

[JoeB131]

Guns were created to save the life of the user…...

a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.

 

[JoeB131]

Someone bursts into your house and shoots you as you're reaching for your gun.
They used a firearm to save their life.
Is that a benign use of a gun?
Can they claim self defence?

Attacking somebody with a firearm and defending yourself with a firearm are two totally different things. No wonder you are so confused.

The guy who burst in was defending himself.
He wasn't going to shoot anyone until the householder reached for a weapon.

No, he had every intention on shooting somebody and put himself in that position. Much different than when you are minding your own business and somebody attacks you. Self-defense does not mean attacking another person. Look it up in the dictionary or on Wiki.

Well...if you really want to you can ignore police instructions, track down a teen ager, pick a fight with him then kill him and get away with it. If you don't believe it ask the piece of shit George Zimmerman....the guy who shot Treyvon Martin. That useless bastard has been in and out of trouble several times since that happened. He was a cop wannabe.

Once again, learn the difference between being attacked and being the attacker.

Zimmerman was talking to police for a couple of minutes and hung up with them. That piece of garbage Martin was hiding between the houses waiting on Zimmerman. When Zimmerman walked by him, Martin attacked.

Zimmerman suffered several injuries including a back injury, two black eyes, a broken nose, and lacerations to the back of the head. Martin on the other hand sustained not even a superficial wound. This according to the autopsy report.

As a CCW holder in my state, I can tell you that in most places, the laws are pretty uniform. In our state (and Florida) the law reads "A licensed firearm carrier can use deadly force if they believe that they (or others) are in jeopardy of serious bodily harm or death."

Given the multiple injuries Zimmerman suffered, it's more than clear he had every reason to believe he was in jeopardy of just that: serious bodily harm or death. That's why he's a free man. I would have shot Martin too and I probably wouldn't have even been changed unless my attacker was black and it drew national attention.

zimmerman was living the gun nut dream, to some day shoot him a Darkie.

Unfortunately, it was a 17 year old kid who was out buying candy, but he was living the dream.

So just ignore that Zimmerman molested his cousin, got fired from his job as a bouncer for breaking a woman's leg, has been arrested a couple of times for slapping his wife and girlfriends around. (Ladies, seriously, you can do better!) He was done living the gun nut dream of shooting one of those menacing darkies!