Why anti gun people are so angry.....

[Bfgrn]

good catch 'herewego' I didn't notice that Bfgrn was posting some anti gun sites stats .

But pro gun stats are acceptable, from a guy who takes funding from one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Why anti gun people are so angry....."

There is no such thing as 'anti-gun people,' consequently no one is 'angry.'

No one of consequence or merit seeks to 'ban' firearms, or compel their 'confiscation.' The vast majority of Americans from one side of the political spectrum to the other support the right of the individual to own a handgun pursuant to the right of self-defense.

The problem, as usual, concerns the extremism on the right, where some conservatives attempt to contrive 'guns' into a 'political issue,' and exhibit their ignorance of the law by maintaining that the Second Amendment right is 'absolute' and not subject to reasonable restrictions by government.

The conflict, therefore, has nothing to do with anyone being 'anti-gun'; rather, the conflict is between those who correctly understand that there are necessary and proper restrictions that can be placed on weapons the Constitution deems 'dangerous and unusual,' and those who reject this fundamental principle. “[T]he Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose[...]the [Second Amendment codifies the] historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.” DC v. Heller (2008)

 

[Iceweasel]

No not really. Look at how many ugn owners there are vs how many incidents of gun violence. If guns correlated to incidents of gun violence we'd have far more incidents than we do.

Criminals account for gun violence, not law-abidding gun owners.

And look at the carnage an assault weapon can cause in mere seconds in a public place. And look at how easy it is for a criminal to walk into a security safe gun show, and buy any weapon he desires without a background check.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

Did you actually research the issue or just listen to anti-gun talking points.....all sales from all dealers go through background checks...sales by private individuals intent on selling guns to criminals are not stopped now or will they be stopped by any new background check system....

They don't need to buy guns in back alleys....they have freinds and relatives who can bypass background checks buy the guns for them..or they steal them and sell them...from the trunk of a car...the same place where they buy their illegal drugs...already....

Want to stop criminals from getting expert advise on guns...then you have to shut down the internet.....

Maybe YOU should do some research before you open your pie hole.

"How strict would gun laws have to be to prevent massacres?"

Strict enough to prevent a criminal from buying guns in the safety, comfort and sanction of a gun show without having a background check run on him. There IS a loophole in the gun show law that allows a big gun dealer to pose as little uncle Joe selling a gun or two, and circumvent doing a background check.

FACT: Gun sellers who claim to be “occasional sellers” are not required by current federal law to conduct background checks on their customers. Furthermore, there is no clear definition of how many guns a person can sell as an “occasional seller” – it could be dozens, or even hundreds.

The Firearm Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) states: 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(21)(D), (22). Those not “engaged in the business” of dealing guns are exempt from the licensure requirement.

So, closing the gun show loophole would not punish any law abiding gun owner.

What is the gun show loophole?

Federal law allows people who sell guns to avoid running background checks or keeping records by calling themselves occasional sellers, and these sellers often congregate at gun shows. The loophole provides criminals with easy access to firearms without having to worry about any background checks.

• Current law requires licensed gun dealers to conduct background checks, because that is the only way to determine whether a person is eligible to buy a gun. Licensed dealers must also keep records about the buyer so ATF can trace the gun if it is recovered at a crime scene.

• 
  
  
  • The law does not, however, require so-called occasional sellers to do these checks – and there’s no clear definition of what qualifies as an occasional seller.[ii]

• 
  
  
  • Many sellers at gun shows abuse that loophole by calling themselves occasional sellers. Because they concentrate at gun shows, it is easy for felons and other prohibited possessors to find someone who will sell to them without a background check.

...........*ATF concluded that “gun shows and flea markets are a major venue for illegal trafficking.”[iii]

• 
  
  
  • Gun shows linked to the Pentagon Shooting: In March 2010, John Bedell – who was prohibited by law from possessing guns – shot two Pentagon police officers with a gun purchased from a private seller at a Las Vegas gun show.

• 
  
  
  • Gun shows were tied to a broad range of violations, including straw purchases and the sale of kits to convert legal guns into illegal machine guns.

Solution: Require occasional sellers to run instant background checks.

How many crimes are committed with guns bought at gun shows?

HOW many are acceptable?

You failed to answer the question.

 

[pismoe]

I don't use stats or numbers Bfgrn , numbers are not my argument . I'm more common sense and focus on the individual home owner , woman , weak , strong or diasabled person on the street , their home or anywhere in the USA . And then I focus on the RIGHT to be armed which is God given or at least a natural RIGHT. Yeah , I don't use numbers to try to justify my guns to people that want to restrict or regulate my guns . I rely on common sense and my Rights that are guaranteed in the USA Constitution and its Bill of Rights .

 

[WinterBorn]

I think there is a lot of anger on both sides of pretty much every issue. The days of civil discourse are, sadly, long gone.

This is part of why I am considering either severely limiting my time on the various forums, or avoiding them altogether. Spouting hate is not constructive or conducive to accomplishing anything at all. The people who can consistently discuss an issue in a civil manner are few and far between.

Well....in the old days....you would call out a jerk and have a duel.....was that more or less civil than today...?

In the "old days" there were rarely any duels over disagreements on political matters. Today there are damn few who discuss an issue without calling names or going ballistic.

Being a jerk is not a capital offense.

But should it be..............?

Fuck no it shouldn't be. Just because someone disagrees with you or is a jerk does not mean they should die.

 

[Bfgrn]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

That's what you ALL say. You are all the same. YOU want to take away rights from citizens, then in the next breath, people like you will complain that the police are all racists. Sorry, but someone needs to inform you all that you are idiots.

The only extremists on this thread are on the right.... the absolutist mentality just doesn't pass for reasonable or intelligent.

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

I guess these guys are "gun-grabbers" too...

 

[WinterBorn]

This looks at the anger and the general rude behavior of some anti gun people...it explains where that comes from......

Here s Why Gun Grabbers Are So Nasty - The Truth About Guns

We’ve noted for a while now how nasty the forces of civilian disarmament have become in recent years. Since their failure to significantly move the anti-gun needle after Newtown — an opportunity they saw as a sure thing for rolling back Second Amendment rights — the gun-grabbing community seems to have ratcheted up (or down, really) the venom and vulgarity. One of our readers, Ozallos, posited the following theory under our post, ‘Why Are Anti-Gunners So Vile? – ConcealedNation.org Reads Their Hate Mail’ . . .

Ok, here’s the deal. You own a gun. They don’t. Or by their very ethos can’t. You have taken the responsibility of security upon yourself and are secure in that fact. Again, they aren’t. You’re a threat to the philosophy they believe in and there are very few ways they have in order to express that frustration. First, they must have somebody else take your guns. Empowering somebody else with guns to take your guns is hypocritical at its very core, but seen as a necessary evil . . .

The ends justify the means and if a few eggs need to be broken, /shrug. You need to burn the village idiot to save him or something.

Have you seen some of the things said about me? I'd say the gun nutz are just as angry.

People tend to get a little pissy when you try and take away their 2nd amendment rights.

Indeed they do. And I have no problem arguing the issue. But first remember that these forums do not determine gun laws. And second, the main person you are arguing with won't change their mind, but others reading the thread may not know the truth or the facts. The latter is who you can win over with an actual argument.

 

[ChrisL]

"Why anti gun people are so angry....."

There is no such thing as 'anti-gun people,' consequently no one is 'angry.'

No one of consequence or merit seeks to 'ban' firearms, or compel their 'confiscation.' The vast majority of Americans from one side of the political spectrum to the other support the right of the individual to own a handgun pursuant to the right of self-defense.

The problem, as usual, concerns the extremism on the right, where some conservatives attempt to contrive 'guns' into a 'political issue,' and exhibit their ignorance of the law by maintaining that the Second Amendment right is 'absolute' and not subject to reasonable restrictions by government.

The conflict, therefore, has nothing to do with anyone being 'anti-gun'; rather, the conflict is between those who correctly understand that there are necessary and proper restrictions that can be placed on weapons the Constitution deems 'dangerous and unusual,' and those who reject this fundamental principle. “[T]he Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose[...]the [Second Amendment codifies the] historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.” DC v. Heller (2008)

Bull. Lies.

 

[ChrisL]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

That's what you ALL say. You are all the same. YOU want to take away rights from citizens, then in the next breath, people like you will complain that the police are all racists. Sorry, but someone needs to inform you all that you are idiots.

The only extremists on this thread are on the right.... the absolutist mentality just doesn't pass for reasonable or intelligent.

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

I guess these guys are "gun-grabbers" too...

More lies and anti rights rhetoric. That's why nobody likes you. Traitor to the American people is all you are.

 

[Iceweasel]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

 

[pismoe]

Reagan forgot to mention the real intent of the second amendment 'Bfgrn' and Scalia has an opinion while I have mine !!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

look at this article about the coming OPEN CARRY in Texas . Me , I just laugh but these anti gunners are little kids and they want restrictions or total disarming , see what you guys think . --- Texas gun bills taking us back to Old West days The Star Telegram The Star Telegram --- uh , you might like it Brian !!

Nonsense.

Again, there is no such thing as 'anti-gunners,' whatever that's supposed to be.

And no one is seeking to 'disarm' anyone or enact regulatory measures contrary to current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

Moreover, one person's opinion on a website is not representative of those who support reasonable, Constitutional firearms regulatory policy, where opposing an open carry law is not to advocate 'violating' the Second Amendment or 'infringing' on anyone's rights.

 

[ChrisL]

They insult our intelligence by pretending they are not anti-rights. These are the same people who spew hatred for the police, but yet only want police to be armed.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

People like BFGRN think a semi auto AR-15 belongs only on the battle field...because it's scary looking.

 

[ChrisL]

look at this article about the coming OPEN CARRY in Texas . Me , I just laugh but these anti gunners are little kids and they want restrictions or total disarming , see what you guys think . --- Texas gun bills taking us back to Old West days The Star Telegram The Star Telegram --- uh , you might like it Brian !!

Nonsense.

Again, there is no such thing as 'anti-gunners,' whatever that's supposed to be.

And no one is seeking to 'disarm' anyone or enact regulatory measures contrary to current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

Moreover, one person's opinion on a website is not representative of those who support reasonable, Constitutional firearms regulatory policy, where opposing an open carry law is not to advocate 'violating' the Second Amendment or 'infringing' on anyone's rights.

Yes it is. It is an infringement upon our rights. Too bad if you're afraid and don't trust your fellow Americans.

 

[Bfgrn]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

Every gun sale should require a background check IMO. But what the gun show loophole allows is dealers who POSE as 'private' sellers to set up a booth at gun shows and sell weapons without a background check. If the 'private' seller suspects the buyer is a criminal, he is supposed to terminate the sale. Undercover buyers/investigators with hidden cameras went to seven gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada, and found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns -- no questions asked.

Investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

 

[Missourian]

Have you seen some of the things said about me? I'd say the gun nutz are just as angry.

It is because you are infantile and stupid, not so much because you are anti-gun.

See here is my point. While making a childish comment he calls me infantile. Oh boy. And I'm not even anti gun.

I think everyone really needs to chill though. Some of the nicest people I know are gun owners and the same can be said for anti gun people. Discuss things in a civil manner.

You are vile. The reason why I call you names is because you are a dishonest hack piece of crap with an agenda. You ignore data and links provided to you. You outright lie. YOU claim you are not anti-gun yet post anti-gun rhetoric in EVERY single gun thread. You are a liar and a traitor to the American people. I hate you. That's why I call YOU names. A lying dishonest sack of crap is all you are. YOU have earned every single name I've called you.

And again the angry gun nut. Thanks for proving my point.

Angry anti gun nut is YOU. You want to leave women defenseless against rapists who may even murder them, and even go so far as to say that women can fight off a rapist and that men are NOT stronger than women. You are a piece of shit.

This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing. Women are the number one driving force behind gun control...conversely, the number one fastest growing segment of gun owners are women.

LAS VEGAS — The gun world is not just a man’s world anymore.

Women are buying more guns, hunting and participating in the shooting sports more than ever, according to a study released Wednesday by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“We’re changing the industry,” said Lucretia Free, publisher of The American Woman Shooter.

In 2001, there were 1.8 million female hunters in the country. In 2013, there were 3.3 million female hunters, an 85 percent increase in the dozen years, according to the study released last week at the shooting sports organization’s annual SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoors Trade) Show in Las Vegas.

In 2001, there were 3.3 million female target shooters in the country. In 2013, that number had grown to 5.4 million, or increased by 60 percent.

And those numbers don’t include the number of women who own a gun only for protection, which is why most women initially buy a gun.

Study More Women Buying Guns Participating In Shooting Sports Times Record
​

What is driving this growth? At least in part the success of the conceal carry movement.

The gun control groups staked their reputations on a lie...that conceal carry would lead to a new "Wild West" where law abiding citizens would be filling the streets with lead! Oh my!

Not only did that narrative prove false, but just the opposite occurred, crime dropped, and responsible citizens (gasp) carried concealed weapons responsibly.

Today, women are asking "why am I not doing that? I am responsible. Why am I leaving myself at a disadvantage?"

And in response, they are not...they are learning about, and buying firearms in droves.

My wife owns her own guns, with far different designated purposes than my own. Where my guns are almost exclusively of the hunting variety, hers are exclusively for the purpose of self defense.

She and her girlfriends have a girls range day once a week. At first there were four...now there are ten.

I keep trying to steal away her Maverick 8-shot Model 88 Security 12 gauge, but so far I have not been successful.

P.S. - Brain and I actually get along pretty well, considering we are on opposite sides of this issue.

 

[Bfgrn]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

People like BFGRN think a semi auto AR-15 belongs only on the battle field...because it's scary looking.

It has nothing to do with looks. It has to do with rate of fire, magazine capacity and the carnage it can inflict in a school, movie theater or any public place where citizens peacefully gather.

 

[Bfgrn]

It is because you are infantile and stupid, not so much because you are anti-gun.

See here is my point. While making a childish comment he calls me infantile. Oh boy. And I'm not even anti gun.

I think everyone really needs to chill though. Some of the nicest people I know are gun owners and the same can be said for anti gun people. Discuss things in a civil manner.

You are vile. The reason why I call you names is because you are a dishonest hack piece of crap with an agenda. You ignore data and links provided to you. You outright lie. YOU claim you are not anti-gun yet post anti-gun rhetoric in EVERY single gun thread. You are a liar and a traitor to the American people. I hate you. That's why I call YOU names. A lying dishonest sack of crap is all you are. YOU have earned every single name I've called you.

And again the angry gun nut. Thanks for proving my point.

Angry anti gun nut is YOU. You want to leave women defenseless against rapists who may even murder them, and even go so far as to say that women can fight off a rapist and that men are NOT stronger than women. You are a piece of shit.

This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing. Women are the number one driving force behind gun control...conversely, the number one fastest growing segment of gun owners are women.

LAS VEGAS — The gun world is not just a man’s world anymore.

Women are buying more guns, hunting and participating in the shooting sports more than ever, according to a study released Wednesday by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“We’re changing the industry,” said Lucretia Free, publisher of The American Woman Shooter.

In 2001, there were 1.8 million female hunters in the country. In 2013, there were 3.3 million female hunters, an 85 percent increase in the dozen years, according to the study released last week at the shooting sports organization’s annual SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoors Trade) Show in Las Vegas.

In 2001, there were 3.3 million female target shooters in the country. In 2013, that number had grown to 5.4 million, or increased by 60 percent.

And those numbers don’t include the number of women who own a gun only for protection, which is why most women initially buy a gun.

Study More Women Buying Guns Participating In Shooting Sports Times Record
​

What is driving this growth? At least in part the success of the conceal carry movement.

The gun control groups staked their reputations on a lie...that conceal carry would lead to a new "Wild West" where law abiding citizens would be filling the streets with lead! Oh my!

Not only did that narrative prove false, but just the opposite occurred, crime dropped, and responsible citizens (gasp) carried concealed weapons responsibly.

Today, women are asking "why am I not doing that? I am responsible. Why am I leaving myself at a disadvantage?"

And in response, they are not.

My wife owns here own guns, with far different designated purposes than my own. Where my guns are almost exclusively of the hunting variety, hers are exclusively for the purpose of self defense.

She and her girlfriends have a girls range day once a week. At first there were four...now there are ten.

I keep trying to steal away her Maverick 8-shot Model 88 Security 12 gauge, but so far I have not been successful.

Herein lies your problem. NO ONE has proposed banning all guns. Not Obama, not Schumer, not Bloomberg, not Feinstein.

Reasonable guns laws are NOT unreasonable, unless you are an absolutist or extremist.

 

[2aguy]

I think there is a lot of anger on both sides of pretty much every issue. The days of civil discourse are, sadly, long gone.

This is part of why I am considering either severely limiting my time on the various forums, or avoiding them altogether. Spouting hate is not constructive or conducive to accomplishing anything at all. The people who can consistently discuss an issue in a civil manner are few and far between.

Well....in the old days....you would call out a jerk and have a duel.....was that more or less civil than today...?

In the "old days" there were rarely any duels over disagreements on political matters. Today there are damn few who discuss an issue without calling names or going ballistic.

Being a jerk is not a capital offense.

But should it be..............?

Fuck no it shouldn't be. Just because someone disagrees with you or is a jerk does not mean they should die.

Yeah...but what if they are a really big jerk?