More sacrifices to the 2nd Amendment

[JerryBaumchen 972]

Hi folks,

I'll try to keep you posted on how this goes:  City of Portland supports gun control Measure 114 as federal judge prepares to hold trial next week - oregonlive.com

Jerry Baumchen

[kallend 1,499]

Some more collateral damage:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/02/us/baltimore-shooting-sunday/index.html

[headoverheels 280]

A suburban Chicago home defense incident:

https://wgntv.com/news/northwest-suburbs/suburban-man-charged-after-accidentally-shooting-himself-while-dreaming/

 

[JerryBaumchen 972]

1 hour ago, headoverheels said:

A suburban Chicago home defense incident:

https://wgntv.com/news/northwest-suburbs/suburban-man-charged-after-accidentally-shooting-himself-while-dreaming/

 

Hi heels,

There was this guy named Charles Darwin; he had some ideas . . . 

Jerry Baumchen

[billvon 2,092]

The latest mass murderer is singing a familiar song.

His social media posts supported Trump and the Second Amendment, and regularly posted mocking memes and videos about Biden.  He claimed Biden was trying to "take our arms."  He posted anti-LGBT memes as well, and said he was planning to "clean up the neighborhood."

Other quotes from his social media site:

"So often we accept the loss of freedoms in the name of safety. But we never feel any safer and we never get the freedoms back.”

“During community patrols I have notice a big shame. So many of our 50 + 60 + 70 year old elders are influencing the youth negatively. They are without a doubt promoting and participating in robbing, prostitution, scamming, and murder.”

He then went out and shot a total of seven people, ages between 2 and 59.  Five died.

I really wonder what it will take before the republicans stop protecting people like this.

 

[wmw999 1,875]

8 minutes ago, billvon said:

I really wonder what it will take before the republicans stop protecting people like this.

I think it’s more that prevention is only for things that people you don’t identify with do (e.g. the border wall, transgender anything), while for things that you can imagine doing (using a gun to “protect” yourself in a situation you started and having it go wrong, domestic violence) should be handled after the event, because preventing it might impact someone like you

Wendy P. 

[billeisele 119]

Two robbers that won't do that again. I would be interesting to see if the 1/week jugging incidents stop.

https://www.kbtx.com/2023/07/08/man-shoots-kills-2-men-trying-rob-him-atm-police-say/

In Alamo City: Jan - May 2022  - 704 robberies, Jan - May 2023  - 710 robberies 

[wmw999 1,875]

They won't. But how many innocent people have died since the last potentially justifiable civilian shooting, and why is it OK to kill 10 (or whatever) innocents to justify the means to kill 2 miscreants?

Wendy P.

[kallend 1,499]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

They won't. But how many innocent people have died since the last potentially justifiable civilian shooting, and why is it OK to kill 10 (or whatever) innocents to justify the means to kill 2 miscreants?

Wendy P.

". . . . and saw two people approach him who he believed were trying to rob him. The man then shot and killed the two men."

 

So summary execution is acceptable if you believe someone is trying to rob you.  

[Phil1111 827]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

They won't. But how many innocent people have died since the last potentially justifiable civilian shooting, and why is it OK to kill 10 (or whatever) innocents to justify the means to kill 2 miscreants?

Wendy P.

During the Vietnam war a US major had a famous quote about the battle of Bến Tre: "'It became necessary to destroy the town to save it,' Today republicans have adopted the same idea about protecting ones family and children. The US is violent and guns are necessary to save ones children.

Think of all the children's lives saved because guns were ready and loaded.

[billeisele 119]

57 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

They won't. But how many innocent people have died since the last potentially justifiable civilian shooting, and why is it OK to kill 10 (or whatever) innocents to justify the means to kill 2 miscreants?

Wendy P.

Good morning Wendy. I know you are much smarter than this statement.

First, yes they will. Those two won't rob again. My statement was merely to point out that if those two were the ones doing that specific crime then there would be a drop in that crime ... until someone else starts doing it.

Comparing two incidents, 10 vs. 2, has no validity. 

The media is not the place to find accurate stats/info on the various ways that guns are misused or used as intended. It's impossible to find good data on the correct use of firearms. This is one article that makes many statements about the lack of clarity on gun data. https://injepijournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40621-022-00384-8

This one discusses the phrase,“a good guy with a gun” is the only thing that can stop “a bad guy with a gun.”  There is little clarity on the issue of legitimate gun use. https://www.thetrace.org/2022/06/defensive-gun-use-data-good-guys-with-guns/#:~:text=According to the survey%2C firearms,average of 36%2C660 per year.

None of that matters. What is important is that the mass shootings are terrible. Some think that guns are the problem, others think not.

We agree on so much.

[billvon 2,092]

4 hours ago, billeisele said:

Good morning Wendy. I know you are much smarter than this statement.

Let's see.  She asked if it was really OK to kill 5 times as many innocent people in order to kill a few guilty people.  You said that the question itself had no validity.  You then posted a study that - you claimed - demonstrated that there were far more good gun uses than she suggested.

However, the study talked about ALL defensive gun uses, including brandishing.  If you include that, you of course have to include all the instances of brandishing being used in muggings, robberies, rape etc.  The study indicated that there were 70,000 defensive uses of a gun a year, compared to 484,000 criminal uses of guns per year.

So if you just go with defensive vs criminal use of guns, guns are used SEVEN times more often for crime than they are used for defense.  So going back to what Wendy said, she is not understating the defensive use of guns.  She is overstating them - per your own data.

[wmw999 1,875]

4 hours ago, billeisele said:

This one discusses the phrase,“a good guy with a gun” is the only thing that can stop “a bad guy with a gun.”  There is little clarity on the issue of legitimate gun use.

I disagree on that second one; there is plenty of clarity for most people, it's just that there is a wide gap between the ends of what people think. The thing is that guns seem to be an easy solution to problems for people without imaginations, just as a hammer is used to let out frustrations sometimes. And the ready availabilty of guns, combined with their relative ease of use (no actual risk much of the time, and you don't have to actually touch someone), makes them attractive too.

They've become a political symbol for a lot of people; I see them as a tool that's the tool of first (or early) resort for too many people, and the tool that other people say absolutely NO ONE should resort to. To me, those are both rather extreme views, but a world with too many guns seems to result in far more dead innocent people than a world with too few guns (as evidenced by most of Europe).

Wendy P.

[JerryBaumchen 972]

6 hours ago, billeisele said:

Two robbers that won't do that again. I would be interesting to see if the 1/week jugging incidents stop.

https://www.kbtx.com/2023/07/08/man-shoots-kills-2-men-trying-rob-him-atm-police-say/

In Alamo City: Jan - May 2022  - 704 robberies, Jan - May 2023  - 710 robberies 

Hi Bill,

Re:  Two robbers that won't do that again.

And, from your link:   Right now, we’re looking at he’s the victim of a robbery and was acting in self-defense,” 

I see nothing in your linked article that says this was an actual robbery.  It might just be someone who had a gun & got scared & decided to kill two innocent people.

Where is your proof that this was a robbery?  You know, that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' thing.

Jerry Baumchen

 

 

[billvon 2,092]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Where is your proof that this was a robbery?  You know, that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' thing.

A handy gun allows you to cancel that lengthy, tedious process.  BOOM!

And if you kill a few (or 5) innocent people in the process?  Well, rather not be judged by 12 than carried by 6 and all that.

[JoeWeber 2,064]

On 3/23/2021 at 7:25 AM, BIGUN said:

And that, is not a "gun problem" that is a "people (mental health) problem."

Then instead of locking up the shooters in asylums, which don’t help, let’s instead lock them up in gun stores.

[GeorgiaDon 290]

A woman was visiting El Paso TX and called for an Uber to take her to a casino to meet with her boyfriend.  Along the way she saw a road sign for an upcoming exit to Juarez, Mexico.  She immediately assumed she was being kidnapped and taken to Mexico, so she pulled out a handgun and shot the driver in the back of the head, killing him.  The road they were driving on was, in fact, the correct route between her hotel and the casino, and they were nowhere near the actual border.  Oh well, nobody's perfect.  Can't have the 2nd amendment without breaking a few eggs after all.

[Phil1111 827]

1 minute ago, GeorgiaDon said:

A woman was visiting El Paso TX and called for an Uber to take her to a casino to meet with her boyfriend.  Along the way she saw a road sign for an upcoming exit to Juarez, Mexico.  She immediately assumed she was being kidnapped and taken to Mexico, so she pulled out a handgun and shot the driver in the back of the head, killing him.  The road they were driving on was, in fact, the correct route between her hotel and the casino, and they were nowhere near the actual border.  Oh well, nobody's perfect.  Can't have the 2nd amendment without breaking a few eggs after all.

Sounds like a matter ready for the republican laws that justify homicide when you feel your life is threatened. Hopefully she won't be charged with anything.

America.

[billvon 2,092]

5 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Sounds like a matter ready for the republican laws that justify homicide when you feel your life is threatened.

Well, they only justify GUN violence.  Had she merely strangled him - that's not covered.

[kallend 1,499]

7 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Bill,

Re:  Two robbers that won't do that again.

And, from your link:   Right now, we’re looking at he’s the victim of a robbery and was acting in self-defense,” 

I see nothing in your linked article that says this was an actual robbery.  It might just be someone who had a gun & got scared & decided to kill two innocent people.

Where is your proof that this was a robbery?  You know, that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' thing.

Jerry Baumchen

 

 

Also from the link:

". . . . and saw two people approach him who he believed were trying to rob him. The man then shot and killed the two men."

We don't know if it was an actual robbery, or just over-active imagination.

[wmw999 1,875]

Would it make a difference if they both had been attacking people at ATM's before, like had been convicted for it? Is it the possible guilt, or the risk to the person doing the defending that's more important?

To me, they can have my money. What I get out of an ATM isn't worth taking a life over. That's a fear of life thing; possessions are just stuff. Someone else's life is just as precious to them as mine is to me.

The fact that someone was, in fact, guilty of trying to steal my stuff is significant, but executing justice is for the judicial system, not the victim directly. Defense means exactly that -- anything else is like executing a preemptive attack because you might be attacked. Had Ukraine attacked Russia during the buildup, that would have been wrong, too. And any more, I don't really think the six-day war, with its preemptive strike, was necessarily right. 

It's all about whether on a grander stage than myself, where do my rights rank? Right there with everyone else's, but so do their rank right there with mine.

Wendy P.

[gowlerk 1,740]

26 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

To me, they can have my money. What I get out of an ATM isn't worth taking a life over.

You are missing the entire point. Many of the people who keep themselves armed with a pistol at the ready dream of the day when they get to use it. Most likely the reality of what happens afterward is nothing like they imagined. But at least their day of glory has arrived.

[Phil1111 827]

14 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

You are missing the entire point. Many of the people who keep themselves armed with a pistol at the ready dream of the day when they get to use it. Most likely the reality of what happens afterward is nothing like they imagined. But at least their day of glory has arrived.

Yep. Payback for when their bike was stolen as a child. Payback because they pay taxes yet people still want to steal from them. Payback because they work so hard yet criminals just don't want to work. Justification for lugging around the .40 cal for a decade because it has better stopping power than the nine. Owning and proving to the Libs that guns are a necessity.

[JoeWeber 2,064]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

You are missing the entire point. Many of the people who keep themselves armed with a pistol at the ready dream of the day when they get to use it. Most likely the reality of what happens afterward is nothing like they imagined. But at least their day of glory has arrived.

Bingo.

[JoeWeber 2,064]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

Yep. Payback for when their bike was stolen as a child. Payback because they pay taxes yet people still want to steal from them. Payback because they work so hard yet criminals just don't want to work. Justification for lugging around the .40 cal for a decade because it has better stopping power than the nine. Owning and proving to the Libs that guns are a necessity.

Una mas Bingo.