the_sarge 0 #26 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. This bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. Thats total bullshit to me... Where i live (Denmark) it is generally considered totally unacceptable to own a firearm for personal defense. And BTW... The lack of firearms in our homes doesn't make it any less safe for us. and your proof is.... Well... I know wikipedia insn't allways an exact source of information, but i think the following numbers prove my point: Homicide rates per 100,000 population by country, 2004: USA: 5.5 Denmark: 0.8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_murder_rate No... You dont live in Denmark, but if Americans saved the money that they use on firearms, and invested it in crime fighting instead, they might be a lot safer than they are now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_sarge 0 #27 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. This bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. Thats total bullshit to me... Where i live (Denmark) it is generally considered totally unacceptable to own a firearm for personal defense. And BTW... The lack of firearms in our homes doesn't make it any less safe for us. So if law-abiding citizens don't have guns, doesn't that mean criminals by default are the only ones with guns? Well... Criminals, and the police. We rely on the state to keep us safe... And in my opinion, they are doing that quite well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #28 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. This bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. Thats total bullshit to me... Where i live (Denmark) it is generally considered totally unacceptable to own a firearm for personal defense. And BTW... The lack of firearms in our homes doesn't make it any less safe for us. So if law-abiding citizens don't have guns, doesn't that mean criminals by default are the only ones with guns? Well... Criminals, and the police. We rely on the state to keep us safe... And in my opinion, they are doing that quite well. It's too bad the justice system in the U.S. can't seem to do that. Cops are overworked and the courts don't bury the bad guys like they should. The result is that if a person in the U.S. wants to stay safe, they must take it upon themselves. And for that, we have the second amendment (which some want to take away).Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #29 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteWell see here's the deal, in the time we've been having this "conversation" in this thread, I've done a little checking. What you've posted has some serious blatant misleading statements and lies in it. Are you absolutely certain you want to take full credit for them? If you would reveal those misleading statements, we could discuss them on an issues basis. Fair enough. Never thought you'd ask! QuoteOk, I've researched it and it's true. We'll just see about that! QuoteEven gun shop owners don't know about this because it is flying under the radar. Highly speculative and highly doubtful as the NRA has made statements about this bill. It's certainly NOT "flying under the radar" and I can't in my wildest imagination believe that gun shop owners don't know about it. QuoteYou will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing. Not even close. So much for the previous "Ok, I've researched it and it's true" statement. QuoteThey would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison. Nowhere in the bill does it even remotely suggest that. Again, either the author doesn't know what he's talking about or is intentionally lying to whip up more fear.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #30 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteWell see here's the deal, in the time we've been having this "conversation" in this thread, I've done a little checking. What you've posted has some serious blatant misleading statements and lies in it. Are you absolutely certain you want to take full credit for them? If you would reveal those misleading statements, we could discuss them on an issues basis. Fair enough. Never thought you'd ask! QuoteOk, I've researched it and it's true. We'll just see about that! QuoteEven gun shop owners don't know about this because it is flying under the radar. Highly speculative and highly doubtful as the NRA has made statements about this bill. It's certainly NOT "flying under the radar" and I can't in my wildest imagination believe that gun shop owners don't know about it. QuoteYou will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing. Not even close. So much for the previous "Ok, I've researched it and it's true" statement. QuoteThey would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison. Nowhere in the bill does it even remotely suggest that. Again, either the author doesn't know what he's talking about or is intentionally lying to whip up more fear. And you have actually read the entire bill?Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #31 February 23, 2009 Yep. Show me where I'm wrong.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #32 February 23, 2009 QuoteYep. Show me where I'm wrong. I wasn't suggesting you are wrong.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #33 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. This bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. Thats total bullshit to me... Where i live (Denmark) it is generally considered totally unacceptable to own a firearm for personal defense. And BTW... The lack of firearms in our homes doesn't make it any less safe for us. and your proof is.... Well... I know wikipedia insn't allways an exact source of information, but i think the following numbers prove my point: Homicide rates per 100,000 population by country, 2004: USA: 5.5 Denmark: 0.8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_murder_rate No... You dont live in Denmark, but if Americans saved the money that they use on firearms, and invested it in crime fighting instead, they might be a lot safer than they are now. A high quality gun costs $500-800, with some much more, and some (shotgun) less. That doesn't pay for much crime fighting. Your wiki link proves that there is more crime in America than in Denmark. But that wasn't your claim, was it? It is a fact that if someone comes into your house with a gun, you're basically fucked. If you had a gun, you're better off. The end result is less clear - does you're having a gun at home mean bad people will too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #34 February 23, 2009 QuoteIt is a fact that if someone comes into your house with a gun, you're basically fucked. Agreed. QuoteIf you had a gun, you're better off. Only in that specific case, which happens far less than most gun owners are willing to admit. In all other cases, you're actually much worse off due to accidents and their use in crimes of passion. Statistically a person (not you specifically, but people as a whole), is much more likely to kill or be killed by a family member with the gun than a criminal invader. Do people stop criminal invaders with guns? Sure. No question about it. Are most people better off having a gun in their home for this purpose? Actually, no.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #35 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteIt is a fact that if someone comes into your house with a gun, you're basically fucked. Agreed. QuoteIf you had a gun, you're better off. Only in that specific case, which happens far less than most gun owners are willing to admit. In all other cases, you're actually much worse off due to accidents and their use in crimes of passion. Statistically a person (not you specifically, but people as a whole), is much more likely to kill or be killed by a family member with the gun than a criminal invader. Do people stop criminal invaders with guns? Sure. No question about it. Are most people better off having a gun in their home for this purpose? Actually, no. I'd like to know here you get your statistics. Your statements may be true concerning general gun use. But if we are to look at stats for persons with concealed handgun licenses, things look very different. Some interesting facts (from http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp): Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. In 1982, a survey of imprisoned criminals found that 34% of them had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim." Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%. Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. At the time the law was passed, critics predicted increases in violence. The founder of the National Organization of Women, Betty Friedan stated: "lethal violence, even in self defense, only engenders more violence." When the law went into effect, the Dade County Police began a program to record all arrest and non arrest incidents involving concealed carry licensees. Between September of 1987 and August of 1992, Dade County recorded 4 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. None of these crimes resulted in an injury. The record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them. Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred: Florida homicide rate -36% U.S. -0.4% Florida handgun homicide rate -41% U.S. +24% 221,443 concealed carry licenses were issued in Florida between October of 1987 and April of 1994. During that time, Florida recorded 18 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. As of 1998, nationwide, there has been 1 recorded incident in which a permit holder shot someone following a traffic accident. The permit holder was not charged, as the grand jury ruled the shooting was in self defense. As of 1998, no permit holder has ever shot a police officer. There have been several cases in which a permit holder has protected an officer's life.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #36 February 23, 2009 >What the hell does Obama being (half) black have to do with anything? The same thing that Obama has to do with this "gun grab" of course! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Halfpastniner 0 #37 February 23, 2009 Quote Only in that specific case, which happens far less than most gun owners are willing to admit. Maybe. But it only has to happen once.BASE 1384 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #38 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. This bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. Thats total bullshit to me... Where i live (Denmark) it is generally considered totally unacceptable to own a firearm for personal defense. And BTW... The lack of firearms in our homes doesn't make it any less safe for us. So if law-abiding citizens don't have guns, doesn't that mean criminals by default are the only ones with guns? Wow - I bet those helpless law abiding Danes are being gunned down by criminals at a fantastic rate. I bet their gun homicide rate is way higher than ours. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #39 February 23, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteWell see here's the deal, in the time we've been having this "conversation" in this thread, I've done a little checking. What you've posted has some serious blatant misleading statements and lies in it. Are you absolutely certain you want to take full credit for them? If you would reveal those misleading statements, we could discuss them on an issues basis. Fair enough. Never thought you'd ask! QuoteOk, I've researched it and it's true. We'll just see about that! QuoteEven gun shop owners don't know about this because it is flying under the radar. Highly speculative and highly doubtful as the NRA has made statements about this bill. It's certainly NOT "flying under the radar" and I can't in my wildest imagination believe that gun shop owners don't know about it. Or maybe the author believes that gun shop owners are illiterate, stupid, or both. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #40 February 23, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote If you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. This bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. Thats total bullshit to me... Where i live (Denmark) it is generally considered totally unacceptable to own a firearm for personal defense. And BTW... The lack of firearms in our homes doesn't make it any less safe for us. and your proof is.... Well... I know wikipedia insn't allways an exact source of information, but i think the following numbers prove my point: Homicide rates per 100,000 population by country, 2004: USA: 5.5 Denmark: 0.8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_murder_rate No... You dont live in Denmark, but if Americans saved the money that they use on firearms, and invested it in crime fighting instead, they might be a lot safer than they are now. A high quality gun costs $500-800, with some much more, and some (shotgun) less. That doesn't pay for much crime fighting. Your wiki link proves that there is more crime in America than in Denmark. But that wasn't your claim, was it? It is a fact that if someone comes into your house with a gun, you're basically fucked. If you had a gun, you're better off. The end result is less clear - does you're having a gun at home mean bad people will too? Guns are among the favorite items stolen by people who break into houses. Maybe the gun will attract criminals and then arm them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #41 February 24, 2009 Quote Guns are among the favorite items stolen by people who break into houses. Maybe the gun will attract criminals and then arm them. One great reason to ignore people who insist on public viewable records for CCW holders, or gun owners. Still a decent reason not to maintain such records in general. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #42 February 24, 2009 Quote Statistically a person (not you specifically, but people as a whole), is much more likely to kill or be killed by a family member with the gun than a criminal invader. Do people stop criminal invaders with guns? Sure. No question about it. Are most people better off having a gun in their home for this purpose? Actually, no. Are you knowingly making this misleading argument? The key with this comparison is "killed." By making the definition of a successful gun use as killing the criminal invader, rather than merely succeeding as a tool of self defense, it minimizes the positive column. This is not accidental - it allows gun controllers to insist that guns are more dangerous than good. To do so, you have to ignore between 65k and 2 million cases per year (wild range on defensive gun use, since often self defense is deemed illegal and thus not reported), which greatly exceed the number of criminals or family members killed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #43 February 24, 2009 Quote Only in that specific case, which happens far less than most gun owners are willing to admit. I don't know, I've had my gun drawn on other people with that had weapons. Those people were wanting to cause harm to others or me. If I hadn't of fired my handgun on Thanksgiving morning, I would have been a pitbull chew toy with possible serious injury. Next you're going to say that I don't count.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #44 February 24, 2009 Quote Next you're going to say that I don't count. I believe you've placed yourself in those positions. The average person has a very low probability that they will ever have an armed criminal break into his home while he is there and somehow thwart the criminal with his gun. That was the side issue being discussed, not the probability of a law enforcement officer drawing his weapon. quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #45 February 24, 2009 QuoteI believe you've placed yourself in those positions. Strike that and reverse it. Others have placed me in those positions with their illegal and inappropriate actions while I was trying to maintain the peace and dignity of the state. How about when I was in college and someone decided that I looked like a ripe target for a strong armed robbery? Luckily no shots had to be fired. My personal well being and, less importantly, my property were preserved with a tactical response and a G17. Does that count? EDIT: I forgot to add that on a personal and a professional level, legislation like the proposed is scary beyond all reason.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #46 February 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteI believe you've placed yourself in those positions. Strike that and reverse it. Others have placed me in those positions with their illegal and inappropriate actions while I was trying to maintain the peace and dignity of the state. Fred, if you're afraid you'll have to overlook it, Besides you knew the job was dangerous when you took it . Quote How about when I was in college and someone decided that I looked like a ripe target for a strong armed robbery? Luckily no shots had to be fired. My personal well being and, less importantly, my property were preserved with a tactical response and a G17. Does that count? Anecdotal though it may be, it still doesn't change the facts that it rarely happens to the average person.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #47 February 24, 2009 Quote Anecdotal though it may be, it still doesn't change the facts that it rarely happens to the average person. Lots of things are much more rare for the average person that results in much more drastic reactions in society. So Paul, you're a site and sound kind of guy, couldn't of you whipped up a cooler theme song for me? Maybe something about the gang I'm in. Our gang colors are blue and people on the street refer to us as "guns and donuts." --"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #48 February 24, 2009 I compared you to a super hero. What more do you want? quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #49 February 24, 2009 More donuts to go with the guns.Ok, as a side note completely off topic, take your left hand and hold it up to the left side of your chest. Make an "OK" sign with your thumb and forefinger, holding the pinky finger towards your chest. Now with your right hand, left it to the same level against your chest making a "gun" with your index finger and thumb. There, the Guns and Donuts "gang sign." Ok, I think its really funny, but I'm sure the humor is drastically lost through the internet. --"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 February 24, 2009 Quote Quote It is a fact that if someone comes into your house with a gun, you're basically fucked. Agreed. Quote If you had a gun, you're better off. Only in that specific case, which happens far less than most gun owners are willing to admit. Yes, they do - hundreds of thousands of times a year - you're right, that's vanishingly small. Quote In all other cases, you're actually much worse off due to accidents and their use in crimes of passion. Statistically a person (not you specifically, but people as a whole), is much more likely to kill or be killed by a family member with the gun than a criminal invader. Kellerman has been debunked so many times it's not funny - what was that you were saying about false data, again? Quote Do people stop criminal invaders with guns? Sure. No question about it. Are most people better off having a gun in their home for this purpose? Actually, no. OpinionMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
