georgerussia

Someone who justifies Iraq war by mentioning Hitler and WWII shows his obvious lack of historical knowledge. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

That's what Wikipedia states ("About 25% of the adults in the United States personally own a gun, the vast majority of them men"). I tried to find a more direct and recent reference, but failed. If you have a more relevant but unbiased reference, I'd like to check it too. NRA estimates (well, it just quotes BATFE so it's not even their own estimate) a 250M guns, giving roughtly 4 guns per a gun owner - which sounds quite realistic assumption. I wonder how many gun owners here have less than four guns? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Man nearly shot in gem burglary Just an example of one of those "armed victims" who nearly shot a bystander. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

At this moment only 25% or so adults in USA own a gun. Generously assuming that one out of ten of them would get a concealed carry permit (a pro-gun paid advocate David Kopel said that very few people get concealed permit in Fla - the number was like 1-3%, so 10% is indeed generous assumption) we end up having maximum a 2.5% chance of someone with a concealed gun being present there - i.e. one out of 40 people may have a concealed gun. Not so much a deterrent. Also if the people worked together and know each others, it may be easy to find out those carriers. In some cases it is extremely easy as some gun owners are very loud about their gun ownership, so for a to-be murderer it wouldn't be a problem to figure those people out and shot them first - just in case. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Please elaborate. So far what you wrote here is pretty much a personal attack, not a discussion. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Nope. I'm one of those people who believes in "eye for eye". * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Well said. You're the man. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Let's keep it simple. He said in post #352 that I "seem to entertain fantasies about blowing up groups of gun folks with a bazooka". If you're saying he was not lying, please show me the post where I was talking about blowing up anyone with a bazooka? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

If you have anything specific to say, then say it. There is no rationale to argue with "I just do not like you" logic. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

He is the one who doesn't want to admit it. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I didn't really see YOU participating in that discussion talking about lies JR wrote, except a couple of childish comments. Nevertheless you were really quick in your judgment. I already explained why. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I'm a participant in this discussion with obvious interests - so obviously I am not. You're not participating, but your comments aren't neutral either. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This is only if anyone considers you a neutral unbiased judge - which I really doubt. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

When you are writing lies, I call it a lie. This includes writing lies and then ask questions about them. And when you ask reasonable question, I provide reasonable answer as it has happened several times in past. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Try to be a man and apologize for the lies you wrote, and then you may earn some respect. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

If your example is only one (and pretty unique) country out of ~200, it has very little value. You obviously understood that yourself as you mentioned "plenty of countries" and not a "single country". That's why I wanted to see other countries besides Switzerland. This is not even saying that Switzerland has only like a 6M population and unique training requirements - not even close what we have in USA, and only allows gun storage. Carrying guns also generally requires a permit which is a "may issue" type (and according to my friend is very hard to get). And Switzerland has their shootings as well. Google Friedrich Leibacher. One serious shooting in ten years sounds small comparing to U.S. until you adjust for the population. Since U.S. population is almost 50x more than Swiss, it basically means that adjusting it to U.S. population means there were 50 shootings in Switzerland during ten years - not exactly a small number anymore. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Because you have claimed at least twice that I have said things which I clearly did not say, I'm not going to answer those questions until you apologize at least for those lies. There is no reason to waste time to write an elaborate answer to someone who shows no basic respect to an opponent. Also I wouldn't answer just "yes" or "no" because you already made up things from a pretty clear sentence in past, so providing a single answer would give you just extra opportunity to make more things up. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Not from everyone - just from someone like JohnRich, who claimed that "there are plenty of countries where there are lots of guns and little violence", and made a whole theory on this basis without proving this statement first. And since you have provided false information in past ("skyrocketing gun crime" in UK, state stores in USSR and so on) as well as multiple lies about my posts, it was necessary to confirm that you indeed have the data to support your claim. Looks like that you do not. This means the point you've made in this post is void and there is nothing else to discuss with you on this point. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Finding the location of a gathering, and then setting up a school nearby, for the purpose of arresting gun folks, constitutes "setting up a fake school zone". Deny it all you want, but it's right there in your own words. You claimed I called for it. "Call for" has a very explicit meaning. It is not there in my post, nor are "fake" school zones. And since you attributed it to me, this was a lie. Nope, you didn't use the words "blowing up" So you admitted that you wrote a lie when you claimed I do. This message was very clear in terms that it didn't state "blowing up". You clearly made it up, and admitted it. Of course you're not going to apoligise for your mistake - you prefer to blame me that you made up things I clearly didn't say, and attributed your lies to me. That's it. Your excuses do not matter, and are quite irrelevant here. With four (or five?) lies your credibility is already well below zero. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

No surprise. This is exactly what I said - you see no issues bringing guns in family restaurants, but somehow see issues bringing a bazooka there - despite all the NRA claims that "you're not supposed to fear the tool". This is what I call double standards. And where is the fine line when it is not "exercise your right" and "escalate a confrontation"? Is it ok to bring an unloaded shotgun? What about three or ten? Maybe a bunch of MP5s, and couple of machetes? This is false claim. What I said that existing laws can be changed through legal means (and this includes Constitution, which can be changed too), and wanting to change a specific law does not make a person a constitutional abuser - it is called "political movement". You probably confused me with some gun owners who openly admitted right in this forum that they plan not to follow the law (i.e. become criminals) if a law restricting guns is passed. Didn't see you going after them though. Well, double standards. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Nope. My position didn't change since the start - I did not claim what he said I did. It is JR who is weaseling trying first to claim he didn't say that, just asked, and then speculating whether I approve them. Of course, it would be quite naive to expect a fair comment from you on that matter, as you're definitely not a neutral party in this discussion. This is a lie, as I did not call for it. Reporting the criminals is already rewarded in U.S. Just to name a few, IRS offer cash rewards for reporting tax cheats, Medicare offer rewards to report frauds. If you consider this being in a Soviet block, then you're already there. Interesting. So if I bring a gun in a restaurant, it's not to kill someone or even not to intimidate, it's to "protest" or "protect my rights". But if I bring a bazooka (assuming the government makes it available - see the original post), it's to intimidate at least. Are you applying double standards? Don't you agree that this is a criminal, and not a tool which commits crimes, and therefore it should not matter which TOOL a CRIMINAL would choose? The reality is that both of them were lies, and clearly claimed that I said something which I did not. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Please list the gun laws which are not being enforced in U.S. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Do you have gun crime statistics in Canada for last twenty years to confirm that? How do you know it does not work? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Name ten of them where we can verify the gun ownership rate and crime statistics. (there are close to 200 countries in the world, so 10 is on a very low side of "plenty", but I'll accept it) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Which was the only important part in our discussion where you jumped in without understanding what exactly we were talking about. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *