The NRA Myth of Arming the Good Guys
 

Mass shootings in the US are on the rise?and ordinary citizens with guns don't stop them.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...shootings-myth

http://media.caglecartoons.com/media...124592_600.jpg

Why shoould I have to give up my rights? So I can just become a helpless victim?

I dont think so. Arm more citizens.

There were armed guards in Columbine and that didn't change a damn thing.

I'm okay with the good guys having the firearms. We need to figure out way to prevent the mentally ill from getting them. That's the key.

What is it with the hysterics? Who suggested that? Why does any discussion about gun regulation lead to huge leaps of assumption and silly scenarios?

Start by banning assault weapons except for military and peace officers

Jesus Christ. :helpme

Fuck that.

BTW - Adam Lanza's mother had plenty of guns...and she was a victim.

We need to take the country back from the fucking gun nuts.

I agree. Shoot them.

Why is everybody worried about assault weapons?

The percentage of crime committed with assault weapons is minimal compared to the amount committed with handguns.

Adam Lanza didnt even use an assault weapon, the media just jumped all over it, and the sheep believed it, because it was stated that he had a bushmaster AR15 in his car.

NEWSFLASH: He didnt shoot those kids in his car.

QTF. :thumbsup

Only FREAKS want assault rifles and high-capacity clips. Not hunters. Not homeowners. Not single gals who want to carry for protection.

Paranoid, creepy FREAKS want these
http://nationalmemo.wpengine.netdna-...-MM918-007.jpg
A Barrett M82 50-Caliber Sniper Rifle - sold legally online.

Start by banning the sale of these weapons of war. It's FUCKING RIDICULOUS that any kook with vein throbbing in his head can get these things. There is NO PURPOSE for such a thing but to kill en masse.

That's just it. You never see it coming. Ever. One moment life is wonderful, and the next moment your unconscious.

Doesn't matter if you have a firearm or not. It only matters who gets the first shot.

Ok, I can see your point. Semi-auto assault rifles are evil. Ban them all.

But this bolt-action rifle with just a 5-round magazine is ok?



:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

GFY is full of Supposed "Men" that have never even been in a fight.
I'm not surprised the pussification of America is Here.

The Ban should be on government, If you are associated in any way, shape or form with government, you are NOT allowed at any time to posess a firearm.

Pussification... I thought NutnFancy was the only person that used that word.

BULLSHIT!

"Yes, Columbine Had Armed Guards?And They Saved Lives!"

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...ves.htm?p=full

From the cited article:

"Yes, the critics respond, and there was an armed security guard at Columbine High School in 1999. Yet, 12 students and a teacher were killed by two armed intruders, as if that disqualified the solution of placing armed guards, possibly unemployed army veterans, at each of our nation's 100,000-plus schools.

Yes, there was, and it was the guard's presence and the resistance he and others offered that kept the carnage less than it might have been.

On April 20, 1999, Neil Gardner, an armed sheriff's deputy who had been policing the school for almost two years, was eating lunch when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold arrived at Columbine with their deadly arsenal and deadlier intentions.

Gardner said he got a call from a custodian that he was needed in the school's back parking lot. A few minutes later, he encountered Harris, and the two exchanged gunfire. The exchange with Harris lasted for an extended period of time, during which Harris' gun jammed.

The deputy and the backup he immediately called for exchanged fire with the shooters a second time and helped begin the evacuation of students, all before SWAT teams arrived, and before Harris and Klebold eventually killed themselves in the library."

Stop it with your liberal lies already!

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

:Oh crap :Oh crap

How many times do you think an accidental shooting occurs by a gun carrier vs how many hero stories unfold? I will bet you anything accidental shooting are a far larger number..


Here I'll help.. The first sentence says that it's "slowly" declining, but still 680 deaths by accidental gun fire in the US during 2008. How many hero's saved he day with their gun in 2008?

The number of accidental shooting deaths in the United States has been slowly declining for many years, although there was a slight jump in the number of deaths in 2008, the last year for which we have statistics. In 2008 there were 680 accidental shooting deaths in the United States, with more than 15,500 shooting injuries. Most disturbing, perhaps, is the number of children involved in accidental shootings. Every day approximately five children are injured or killed on a nationwide basis as a result of handguns. The primary cause of youth-involved shooting rests with the fact that children find loaded handguns in the home – and natural curiosity leads them down the road to disaster

Each year approximately 100 people are injured or killed while cleaning a firearm and failing to exercise proper caution.

Hunting accidents account for approximately 160 accidental shootings each year, with an average of 50 fatalities.

source: http://www.thesurvivorsclub.org/extr...ental-shooting

I was reading some death row stats a few months ago, almost every person on death row had already been convicted of manslaughter, served time and was released. and that's a very interesting statistic that should really guide the legal system.

That was more or less done in 1934 then strengthened in 1986. In 1994 an "Assault Weapons Ban" was put in place to cover what you are mistakenly referring to as an "Assault Weapon" and that did nothing to stop crime. Maybe if you paid attention to history and current laws instead of the media you would know these things.

Educate yourself.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/media-...e#.UN42t-qQ1fo

I know you are responding to what Rochard said, but the point you guys always miss in these hero defender situations, is more times than not a successful defense by a gun carrier is usually at the hands of someone in law enforcement not some random guy carrying a gun hoping to be a hero.

I do support gun ownership, but honestly it does scare me at times that pretty much any idiot can get their hands on a gun in this country. I also have never been in a situation where I felt having a gun would help the situation.

The chances of ever needing to defend one's self with a gun for the average American is probably along the same lines of your chance of being in a plane crash. Of course your chances go up if you are in bad areas, but you always have the choice to remove yourself from that area.

I can tell you I've worked in some pretty bad areas before and never once did I feel my life was threatened just because I was there or that I needed a gun to protect myself.

---- According to an annual report published by the National Safety Council, there were 39,800 deaths last year related to motor vehicles in 2008.

so what's you're point? people with cars are stupider than people with guns?

the armed guards changed a lot of stuff, saved very many lives... and yes the mentally ill should not be allowed to have weapons...

how about this though. say when you're about 20 you get drunk and start a fight in bar, get arrested and spend the night in jail... no big deal happens all the time to kids, life goes on... never get in any more trouble

BUT with 'rigorous mental health laws in effect' you are labeled unstable, prone to violence and assigned a negative mental health profile that follows you the rest of your life. put on medication. you have problems finding work, no bank loans, health ins denied etc... AND your kids will be labeled a genetically unstable, put on a watch list and possible medicated as well

you're are supposed to be a smart guy... think about it... all these 'kids' at GFY have all these 'one stop shopping solutions' with out any life experience or understanding of the complexities of the situation.... this is the fucking reality of 'sorting out the fucking nuts'

I really support gun ownership with tactical training and a fail clause that denies the gun

Cars are used far more often than guns, anyone with half a brain could figure that is going to cause for a more deaths due to accidents.

I would say there are more guns than cars in the US, anyone with half a brain should be able to figure that out :winkwink:

I do too, but truth of the matter is that it won't stop the mass type shooting. In just about every one of these cases the attacker could likely get the guns regardless if it were a little harder.

More training, stricter registration & focusing on criminals/unregistered guns will have the biggest effect on deaths & shootings. It's just not gonna solve these mass type shootings like the one in Conn.

Meaning I don't support a ban as a knee jerk reaction to a random mass shooting, but rather looking at the overall picture to see what could have the larger affect in curbing gun crime/violence.

They just want to start there. Then they start including handguns as "assault pistols." These guys see opportunity to grab guns everytime this happens. And it doesn't happen often. But when it does, it occurs in a "Gun Free Zone." These were created by anti gun politicians, not the NRA.

There is roughly the same number. It's about 250-300 mil registered cars in the US and about the same number of guns. However those 250 mil guns are spread out across roughly 50 million households.

That's roughly 45-50% of US household that have a gun meanwhile it's only about 9% of the households in the US that don't have a car or roughly 91% that do.

Meaning it's far more likely for a gun owner to own more than one gun than it is for a car owner to own more than one car and simply put cars are used far more often by more people than guns, which is why they are involved in more deaths.

We are not living in the caveman age, stone age, bronze age or whatever. We are technologically advanced right now. Still, some humans act like apes. Think about Darwin. These humans are thinking about the first time they saw a hammer, axe or metal gun. How violent can they become… Guns are most dangerous because they can create mass shootings. Are defenses really defenses? The courts are there to decide. Good luck.

Even in the Old west they had gun free zone.. Other wise known as towns you couldn't enter and carry a gun. :2 cents:

I don't remember that. Not old enough. But I bet outlaws would love going into town if that is true. They probably ended up having to have an armed Marshall on site at all times.

What bullshit? There was an armed guard there, and the killings still took place.

I have no problems going to the airports here in the US and seeing what looks like armed soldiers. Hell, we should have United States Marines guarding our airports!

AGAIN,

He drew Fire so a wounded person could get away according to what I read. Also if drawing fire from a shooter, that shooter is NOT killing people at the time. (room to room style)

But even if the above is not correct or they even ran away .....
TELL ME WHAT IT HURT HAVING THEM THERE? You make it seem like it made the situation WORSE, it did not, and that security guard "might" have shot and killed one of the shooters.

I KNOW for a FACT that this would NOT of even been a chance of killing the shooter without the security guards and took the police what 45 minutes, an hour, what was the time?

Your argument does NOT Hold any water, since having them there did not make things worse.

100%

Bring our troops Home.
I Loved them in the airports and other places.
We are already spending the money, be cheaper to have our guys services over here than over seas in a pointless endless money pit war(s)

it's a big mess made bigger because self seeking, mentally ill people are in change of sorting it out (politicians :))

Guys, the Second Ammendment to the constitution says that: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

It doesn't specify that the "people" (which means the citizens of the United States) can only have a certain type of weapon.

And banning any kind of weapon is "infringing".

It's this simple...either the second ammendment will be stripped, or shut the fuck up.

P.S.: LOL at "training"
It ain't fucking brain surgery to shoot a gun and/or lock your gun up when you aren't using it. "training"

People like you will be the second group to go when the shit hits the fan. Owing a gun means nothing if you aren't properly trained in how to handle it. There is far more to it than pointing and squeezing the trigger. If you're not properly trained, somebody like me will roll up and take everything you have then bitch slap you with your own gun.

If there were no need for training then there would not be so many firearms training groups out there.

I can't wait to be the first kid on my block with my own tactical nuke for self defense.

amazing collection of loons

yeah right. My dad had me shooting guns since I was 5 years old. (my family owned cattle and orange groves...literally thousands of acres of land)

You keep on "training" on how to "handle it"

But if you break into my house, I have a chrome shotgun with 5 shells full of birdshot that will make you wish you were dead. And I don't even have to aim that very well. It's scattershot and will fuck you up BAD.

You just keep on training and waitng for the "shit to hit the fan"

Your kindergarten reading level cartoon makes a persuasive argument. I'm sold.

I don't beleive in any gun bans (a short term solution that won't work) but the The Second Amendment states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

To me that is more about arming the military than a person's indiviual freedom, but yes the Second Ammendmant will be stripped like the others:

1st Amendment: Well republicans are trying to create a Christian state, infact A GOP superstar (Michelle Bachman) wanted a witch hunt looking for any muslim in the government

4th Amendment: Google patriot act

5th Amendment: Gone, you can be held as a terrorist with no trial

6th Amendment: Government can now decline a witness from testifying and present a "summary" of the testimony.

7th Amendment: Supreme courts handed big Corporations a major victory and crippled the ability of consumers to file class action law suits

So basically the Constitution is something that can be changed or ignored, the Second Amendment will be no different

crockett, you won't ever even have a slingshot. lol

Like I said, if the people (the citizens of the U.S.) no longer want the right to be armed...then the people need to abolish the 2nd amendment.

Everything else is stupid and unconstitutional.

A "militia" is not the govt. military. It's the exact opposite.

Remember, the constitution was written by a group of revolutionaries whom had just finished rising up against an oppressive govt. and against all odds won their freedom from them.

They envisioned being able to do the same thing anytime the govt. became oppressive. Of course we all know that if you tried that now, the govt. would kill you and all your cohorts and brand you as "terrorists".

I think the 2nd ammendment gives me the right to any arms that I want. Not what I "need" as so many are trying to say. But what I WANT.

Right now all I have is a shotgun just in case someone were to break into my home. My German shepard would attack them while I grabbed my shotgun.
I'd also like to own a nice pistol for my office in my backyard Casita. I work late outside and if somebody were to break into the main house it would be nice to have a pistol out here with me to take in and defend my family.

But if I wanted to have some kind of crazy ass gun that fired a million rounds...I should be able to according to the constitution.

So if you think that is wrong, then we need to get rid of the 2nd ammendment. That's the way it's supposed to be done. Not try to tiptoe around it.

A little research will show that the Second Amendment had more to do with freedom than historical militias. Here is what some of the Founding Fathers actually said about arms:

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms, disarm only those who are neither inclined, nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants. They serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1764

What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.
-- Thomas Jefferson

Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't.
-- Ben Franklin

Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.
--Thomas Paine

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
-- George Washington

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined?The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.
--Patrick Henry.

Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms under our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?
-- Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot, Debates at 386.

The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.
--Samuel Adams, debates & Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87.

The right of the people to keep and bear?arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country?
--James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).

(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation?(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
--James Madison.

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government...
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist (#28) .

The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
--Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-B.

To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them.
-- George Mason

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.
--Noah Webster, ?An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (1787) in Pamplets on the Constitution of the United States (P.Ford, 1888)

[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or the state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.
-- Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

Don't bring up those pesky founding fathers.

You have to understand that they didn't live in 2012 and don't understand how things are now.

It's best just to let those nice and benevolent police officers have guns. They are there to protect us and would never abuse their power.
Just imagine how much nicer they will be when they are the only ones with guns. :)

This just proves my point. We can spend tens of billions a year on armed guards at schools and it's not going to stop mass murders at schools. Once a madman has a gun in their hands, it's too late and they will kill. At Columbine it was 13 dead and 21 wounded, and the armed guard did nothing to stop the killing, other officers arrived on the scene, and the two killers committed suicide.

If you are twenty years old and get drunk enough in public to start a bar fight, well, clearly your not mature enough to own a firearm.

Years ago I had a neighbor who was arrested three times in one year for assaulting his wife. For reasons I cannot understand no one thought to take away his firearms until he was shooting at his wife... Really? Why isn't there a law in place saying "If you are charged with assault, we are searching your house and taking away your firearms". Common fucking sense.