The Right To Bear Arms

[EatMorChikin]

Somewhere between his story and yours is the truth....

I'm new here so I must ask. Are you the social commentator parrot?

 

[Flash]

That is war. What is your point? Guns won't defend you from modern armies. Bombs fall from the sky.

Wrong! History is full of examples of where a lesser armed revolution succeeded against a more heavily armed government force. Our own American revolution is one of them.

The reason you Moon Bats are so afraid of firearms is that you know that they could pose a threat to your beloved big government and the welfare checks and free cell phones and that scares you to death.

However, you don't have to worry your little Moon Bat head. Americans nowadays are too chickenshit to hold the government accountable for anything. You are home free, guns or no guns.

 

[Flash]

[
Puerto Rico....has the strictest gun control in the United States and it's territories...it is an island so you can't just drive illegal guns across the border....and it has the highest murder rate in the world......

PR gun laws - "Reasonable gun control", according go the anti-gun loons
-A license is required to purchase any firearm or ammunition.
-All firearms must be registered with the Puerto Rico Police.
-"Assault weapons" and .50 BMG rifles prohibited.
-Magazine capacity restriction? Yes
-A target shooting license is required to purchase any firearm or ammunition.
-The Commonwealth currently has a "may issue" policy for the issuance of concealed carry permits. In order to obtain one the applicant must already have a target shooting license and must appear before a judge and provide proof of a strong need for a permit. Very few people are issued permits.
-Open carry is prohibited.
-Automatic firearms are prohibited.

Puerto Rico
% of homicides w/ firearms:94.8%
# of gun-related homicides per 100k population: 18.3
800,000 guns, 692 gun murders. 99.9135% of guns used to commit murder

Clearly, PR gun control laws work.
/sarcasm

The Moon Bats think New York's SAFE act is "reasonable gun control" but it put a veteran in jail for having a couple of empty AR-15 magazines in his trunk a week after the law was enacted and another veteran had his guns confiscated because he went to see a doctor about insomnia.

You can't trust Moon Bats to get it right with "reasonable" because their agenda is too unreasonable.

 

[2aguy]

You know the 230 number is probably too low.....when a homicide is changed from murder to justified by a prosecutor or the killer is found innocent in court, the FBI doesn't change the data....so that number is off....probably too low....but still pretty good considering that law abiding gun owners use their guns 1.6 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack and save lives....

It is from the FBI. Not going to find more accurate number. You mean mostly criminals defending themselves as kleck has admitted.

Brain....Kleck did not say self defense deaths are criminals fighting criminals....he most definitely said that back in the 90s when people had their rights violated to carry weapons for self defense, many of them did any way...and he didn't quantify how many of the 2.5 million were that situation anyway....so your using it is decietful.....they were not gang members or drug dealers just average citizens who needed to protect themselves.....and the 238 is not accurate...the FBI does not follow up on homicides and if they stay justifiable or not....so they don't change their numbers....

He said most defenders are involved in criminal activity. That makes them criminals.

And he pointed out that they were carrying guns for protection from criminals and in many cases it was not legal at the time...they were not actual criminals conducting criminal business, just law abiding citizens practising their 2nd amendment rights...and we still don't know how many of the 2.5 million even fit that category.....

No he said they were involved in criminal activity. You are making up the rest to candy coat it.

No...you didn't post his whole quote in context....he specifically says in many states carrying a gun for protection was illegal.....but people did it anyway.....

 

[2aguy]

actually, no....Weimar Germany began taking away guns from people....and then the nazis faced disarmed Jews and dissenters when they started their rise to power...instead of facing Jewish business owners who could fight back, their brown shirts had free reign because they were younger, stronger, in greater numbers and more aggressive....everything that a gun will equalize.....if more Germans were armed then the brown shirts, much like our klan in the south, wouldn't have been as effective at beating their enemies into submission.....

That's old bill. And for obvious reasons won't happen in a country with real freedom and voting rights.

You don't think that could ever happen again.....really?

It's been a long time and lots of countries have few guns. So yes it won't happen. You insult our military if you say they will turn on us.

Sorry....you are delusional...........I won't bet the lives of future generations on your naivete ..........

Right so why are so many countries with few guns not taken over by tyrants? Sorry but that view is just silly.

Because today, the United States has been ready and willing to come to their aid....sadly, we can't do that anymore....we can't even fight terrorists without getting bored and wanting to bring our troops home....

 

[Ernie S.]

[




I carry a gun every day, hoping I never have to use it.

I own a bar. I left my place of business at a little after midnight last night and headed home. At 2AM, I got a call from my very hot, but very feminine bartender. She informed me that someone had called, asking when we closed, saying they were in a town a half hour away. When told we stopped serving at 2AM, their location magically changed to here in Foley. THEN they asked if we had security. She answered that we did, although the man doing security last night is not well trained and although large, is not a fighter type. (regular security guy down with the flu)
A couple minutes later, a customer goes out to walk a petite female to her car and sees 3 people lurking in the bushes just off our north lot. He brings her back in and tells Megan, security and another fellow what's going on. Megan calls me and tells me what's going on.
Henry, a huge black man and a good friend of Doc Holliday's goes out and makes his presence known. He also retrieves his Glock from his truck and comes back in. I arrive in 4 minutes, pull in the lot and make a wide sweep of the bushes with my high beams and flashlight with a Taurus .40 in my hand.
The three were back. One, I'm sure, had been in earlier. They saw me and my gun and took off running.

The fact that at least one had been in Doc's at least once before, makes him recognizable which makes a robbery a very dangerous situation since felons hate witnesses.
As people left, I walked out first, checked the lot and then walked with them to their cars.
At that point, the weapon was no longer concealed. No one freaked out or felt threatened by my gun and all were very thankful I made every effort to keep them safe.
I stayed and help staff clean and close. I got home at 4:20 AM.
So Ludley, Why didn't I kill anyone last night?

I'm glad everything worked out, and there is a reasonable chance they wont be back. They will move on to an easier target.

I once used my Sig P226 to deter a situation at my home, and I never had to fire a shot. They guy tried calling the cops on me, saying I threatened him with a gun. Yeah no shit Sherlock, you walked into my home not knowing I was home. They all gathered outside, and called me asking me to come out. I refused, knowing full well the first thing they would do after that is enter and take my arms.

After it was all said and done, and I talked to someone higher up on the phone the situation became diffused and all the follow up from that point was handled by phone. The guy was built like an offensive lineman, and I am not that big of a guy. He was someone I sort of knew but was not friends with, and he had no business in my home uninvited.

Somewhere between his story and yours is the truth....

I can't vouch for him....

 

[Ernie S.]

Somewhere between his story and yours is the truth....

I'm new here so I must ask. Are you the social commentator parrot?

No he's the resident gun grabber.

 

[Brain357]

Somewhere between his story and yours is the truth....

I'm new here so I must ask. Are you the social commentator parrot?

No he's the resident gun grabber.

I've never suggested grabbing anyone's gun. You seem to be mistaken.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You can't trust Moon Bats to get it right with "reasonable" because their agenda is too unreasonable.

Anti-gun loons are only interested in making it harder for the law abiding to exercise their right to self-defense.
They have no other agenda.

 

[Brain357]

You can't trust Moon Bats to get it right with "reasonable" because their agenda is too unreasonable.

Anti-gun loons are only interested in making it harder for the law abiding to exercise their right to self-defense.
They have no other agenda.

No they are interested in making it harder for criminals to get guns. Often they happen to be the same given how many comcealed carry holders turn criminal. Whether their efforts are effective is the debate.

 

[Flash]

No they are interested in making it harder for criminals to get guns. Often they happen to be the same given how many comcealed carry holders turn criminal. Whether their efforts are effective is the debate.

What criminal is going to be deterred by any stupid anti gun law?

Most firearm crimes are committed with illegal or stolen firearms so why do you think making even more laws is going to change anything? Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country and the worse crime rate so what addition law is going to change that?

Even in a "shall issue" state a concealed weapon permit usually requires a significant background check so if they think concealed weapon permit holders are potential criminals then what degree of gun control are they suggesting?

There is a Bill of Rights that says that Americans have the individual right to keep and bear arms. The Libtards should lean to live with it.

 

[Brain357]

No they are interested in making it harder for criminals to get guns. Often they happen to be the same given how many comcealed carry holders turn criminal. Whether their efforts are effective is the debate.

What criminal is going to be deterred by any stupid anti gun law?

Most firearm crimes are committed with illegal or stolen firearms so why do you think making even more laws is going to change anything? Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country and the worse crime rate so what addition law is going to change that?

Even in a "shall issue" state a concealed weapon permit usually requires a significant background check so if they think concealed weapon permit holders are potential criminals then what degree of gun control are they suggesting?

There is a Bill of Rights that says that Americans have the individual right to keep and bear arms. The Libtards should lean to live with it.

Right now felons can easily get around background checks by buying from a private seller. Why not make it harder for them?

Ok so if many crimes involve stolen guns than maybe laws are needed to keep guns from being stolen. Like they must be stored in a safe.

The machine gun laws have been very effective. They are almost never used in crime.

 

[2aguy]

You can't trust Moon Bats to get it right with "reasonable" because their agenda is too unreasonable.

Anti-gun loons are only interested in making it harder for the law abiding to exercise their right to self-defense.
They have no other agenda.

No they are interested in making it harder for criminals to get guns. Often they happen to be the same given how many comcealed carry holders turn criminal. Whether their efforts are effective is the debate.

Brain.....they have stats on concealed carry permit holders and by far they are more law abiding than regular citizens and even police officers....and not one gun control law has stopped the 8-9,000 gun murders a year, mainly in small block areas in our inner cities, nor has it stopped any of the mass shooters, many of whom have followed all of the laws you want and we already have.....

 

[2aguy]

The machine gun laws have been very effective. They are almost never used in crime.

The criminals who need them use them....ask the Mexican drug cartels.....most gangs use concealable weapons and rarely use rifles of any sort....that is why you don't see them used, not because the laws have been effective...just ask the three terrorists in France, with stricter gun control than we have how they had military grade rifles, a rocket propelled grenade launcher and grenades.....

 

[Flash]

Right now felons can easily get around background checks by buying from a private seller. Why not make it harder for them?

Ok so if many crimes involve stolen guns than maybe laws are needed to keep guns from being stolen. Like they must be stored in a safe.

The machine gun laws have been very effective. They are almost never used in crime.

The problem with "making it harder for criminals to get firearms" is that it never stops criminals from getting the weapons but it infringes on the people that have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Felons or anybody that wants to commit a crime will always be able to get a firearm if they want one so what difference would any additional gun law make?

The terrorist in Paris is a great example of that. The French has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world and the bad guys got their guns and did their bad deeds.

The NFA laws requires that you pay a $200 tax and get the chief law enforcement officer of a area to sign, which is usually a rubber stamp in most non commie states. All the NFA laws do is make it more difficult for the law abiding citizens like myself to own a machine gun. The drug gangs and other criminals that use illegal FA weapon just ignore the NFA laws so it is really no deterrent.

NFA laws are not effective. The people that abide by the NFA laws are not criminals to start with and that is the reason that registered Class III weapons are not ever used in crimes but that doesn't do anything to stop the criminals from using illegal automatic weapons.

 

[2aguy]

These stories look at how law abiding concealed carry permit holders actually are....

From Texas. also discusses distortions in stats.....

Texas Concealed Handgun Carriers Law-abiding Public Benefactors NCPAFrom Reason Magazine, on NYT article....


NYT Scare Story About Carry Permit Holders Shows They Are Remarkably Law-Abiding - Hit Run Reason.com

Excluding traffic offenses, the Times counts 2,400 over five years, of which 200 were felonies. More relevant (since critics of nondiscretionary permit laws worry that they contribute to gun violence), "More than 200 permit holders were also convicted of gun- or weapon-related felonies or misdemeanors, including roughly 60 who committed weapon-related assaults."

That's a dozen gun assaults a year. How many permit holders are there in North Carolina? According to the story, "more than 240,000." So 0.2 percent of them are convicted of a non-traffic-related offense each year, about 0.017 percent are convicted of a felony, and only 0.005 percent are convicted of a gun assault.

The Times concedes that the number of permit holders convicted of crimes "represents a small percentage of those with permits." More like "tiny." By comparison, about 0.35 percent of all Americans are [URL='http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=233']convicted

of a felony each year--more than 20 times the rate among North Carolina permit holders. It seems clear these people are far more law-abiding than the general population, a finding consistent with data from other states. Such data are not surprising, since law-abidingness, as measured by a clean criminal record, is one requirement for a carry permit.

[/URL]

Between horror stories that suggest letting people carry guns in public fosters violence, the Times admits there is little evidence to substantiate that fear:

John Lott

CPRC in the Christian Science Monitor How law-abiding are concealed handgun permit holders - Crime Prevention Research Center

 

[2aguy]

Right now felons can easily get around background checks by buying from a private seller. Why not make it harder for them?

Ok so if many crimes involve stolen guns than maybe laws are needed to keep guns from being stolen. Like they must be stored in a safe.

The machine gun laws have been very effective. They are almost never used in crime.

The problem with "making it harder for criminals to get firearms" is that it never stops criminals from getting the weapons but it infringes on the people that have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Felons or anybody that wants to commit a crime will always be able to get a firearm if they want one so what difference would any additional gun law make?

The terrorist in Paris is a great example of that. The French has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world and the bad guys got their guns and did their bad deeds.

The NFA laws requires that you pay a $200 tax and get the chief law enforcement officer of a area to sign, which is usually a rubber stamp in most non commie states. All the NFA laws do is make it more difficult for the law abiding citizens like myself to own a machine gun. The drug gangs and other criminals that use illegal FA weapon just ignore the NFA laws so it is really no deterrent.

NFA laws are not effective. The people that abide by the NFA laws are not criminals to start with and that is the reason that registered Class III weapons are not ever used in crimes but that doesn't do anything to stop the criminals from using illegal automatic weapons.

Gun laws will not stop criminals from getting guns if they want or need them...it stops law abiding citizens from having them......and that is the main goal....gun grabbers want to control people, they know they can't control criminals, but the can damned sure control law abiding people with laws....and they will do that whatever it takes.........

 

[Flash]

These stories look at how law abiding concealed carry permit holders actually are....

That is a good example that background checks (that you have to get to have a CWP) really do nothing to stop people from using weapons for illegal purposes.

If I wanted to commit a crime the fact that I have a CWP (or didn't have one) would not factor in it.

Gun control laws on any level is not much of a deterrent at all. It is naive to think so. The evidence is overwhelming that gun control laws do not stop vilolent crime, anywhere in the world and especallialy here in the US.

All gun control laws do is infringe on the constitutional rights of the people that were never going to use a gun in a crime.

 

[2aguy]

No they are interested in making it harder for criminals to get guns. Often they happen to be the same given how many comcealed carry holders turn criminal. Whether their efforts are effective is the debate.

What criminal is going to be deterred by any stupid anti gun law?

Most firearm crimes are committed with illegal or stolen firearms so why do you think making even more laws is going to change anything? Chicago has the strictest gun control laws in the country and the worse crime rate so what addition law is going to change that?

Even in a "shall issue" state a concealed weapon permit usually requires a significant background check so if they think concealed weapon permit holders are potential criminals then what degree of gun control are they suggesting?

There is a Bill of Rights that says that Americans have the individual right to keep and bear arms. The Libtards should lean to live with it.

Right now felons can easily get around background checks by buying from a private seller. Why not make it harder for them?

Ok so if many crimes involve stolen guns than maybe laws are needed to keep guns from being stolen. Like they must be stored in a safe.

The machine gun laws have been very effective. They are almost never used in crime.

If you keep your guns in your home...there is no reason the government has to get involved in how you store those guns... If someone breaks into your home they are making you a victim by stealing your guns....and as we have seen in Britain, once they mandate storing guns in safes, they will want the ability to check on those safes and if they are in your home they will try to penalize you if they see your safe is not locked....it happened in Britain, they want that here.....

Not one more gun, bullet, piece of equipment...they have all they can have and we will prevent further encroachment.....

 

[Little-Acorn]

Gun laws will not stop criminals from getting guns if they want or need them...it stops law abiding citizens from having them......and that is the main goal....gun grabbers want to control people, they know they can't control criminals, but the can damned sure control law abiding people with laws....and they will do that whatever it takes.........

^^^^^^ This. ^^^^^^