Guns- Putting it in perspective in my real world.

I kind of like my Constitutional RIGHT to not be shot while going about my business... shopping... working.... watching a movie...etc... AND the last thing we need is everyone and their brother shooting in every direction to "protect" us... I see a whole lot more people killed that way.. Imagine if people were armed in that darkened movie theater.. How many more would have been killed by "friendly fire". It would be pure bedlam... I prefer to take my chances in being hit by a madman than having two dozen well meaning "marksmen" firing randomly in any direction they THINK the shots are coming from.. I imagine them all shooting one another.. and a few innocent people as collateral damage.
 

In my opinion, I think the anti gun group are the ones spreading paranoia, such as gun owners are killers waiting to happen, because they are following their constitutional right to own guns. Most gun owners are law abiding citizens....it's the criminals that need to be stopped. Gun free zones are turning into kill zones. They are letting criminals and mentally unbalanced people know there are vulnerable people inside.

I agree with you Misty. I've said many times before that the majority of gun owners in America are responsible law-abiding citizens. Gun-free zones are definitely the targets in many of these shootings done by mentally disturbed people, many of whom are on harmful pharmaceuticals for anxiety or depression, which have side effects of wanting to commit homicide or suicide. But nobody learns from this, that's why it will happen again and again. Then on the anniversary of each incident, the media will revive the fear by covering the incident again, for another week or so, very similar to brainwashing.

The positive news about guns don't make the headlines, lucky if there's a tiny blurb in the newspaper about it. I know the mainstream media loves to run with any of these shooting stories, to put fear into the hearts of the public, and promote their agenda, and it's working like a charm.

The criminals on the streets, especially gangs, do most of the killing. They all get their guns off the streets illegally, and will continue to do so regardless of any new gun laws. When the death numbers rise due to those killings, it doesn't make the headlines, wonder why the government doesn't focus in on that. If they get a handle on the street/gang crime, the numbers of homicides would drop dramatically. Those in power prefer not to do anything about the criminal element in the United States, they'd rather target the average American citizen instead.

timthumb.php
 
Except.. as I stated above... it takes a whole lot of skill to assess a shooting situation and determine what to shoot back at.. This is a skill that most ordinary gun owners simply do not have. Can you imagine a shooter being fired at by someone.. and ANOTHER someone comes along and is not sure WHICH shooter to fire at? Then an a few dozen more... Owning and shooting a gun is one thing... Shooting and hitting the right target quite another...

As for the old saw... "Only the criminals will have guns".... well Duh..... that's why they are called criminals... They don't obey ANY laws anyway.. so maybe we should do away with all laws... I mean.. since criminals are going to break them...
 

I agree with you Misty. I've said many times before that the majority of gun owners in America are responsible law-abiding citizens. Gun-free zones are definitely the targets in many of these shootings done by mentally disturbed people, many of whom are on harmful pharmaceuticals for anxiety or depression, which have side effects of wanting to commit homicide or suicide. But nobody learns from this, that's why it will happen again and again. Then on the anniversary of each incident, the media will revive the fear by covering the incident again, for another week or so, very similar to brainwashing.

The positive news about guns don't make the headlines, lucky if there's a tiny blurb in the newspaper about it. I know the mainstream media loves to run with any of these shooting stories, to put fear into the hearts of the public, and promote their agenda, and it's working like a charm.

The criminals on the streets, especially gangs, do most of the killing. They all get their guns off the streets illegally, and will continue to do so regardless of any new gun laws. When the death numbers rise due to those killings, it doesn't make the headlines, wonder why the government doesn't focus in on that. If they get a handle on the street/gang crime, the numbers of homicides would drop dramatically. Those in power prefer not to do anything about the criminal element in the United States, they'd rather target the average American citizen instead.

timthumb.php

So true, Seabreeze, about the young mentally ill, who are going into schools, and killing students. They have been on antidepressants, which you mentioned the side effects of those, and also they have been playing video games. Many of the video games today are so violent and so life like, and they show killing and killing police officers etc. When I went to school, there were many gun owners and there were never any school shootings. There were not any violent video games or very violent movies as there are today either. Why are these not being investigated and stopped? They could have a big influence on the mindset of the killers in the mass murders happening today. Where is the media outrage against these?
 
I have guns in my home and from time to time, my son and I will go to the range and try to outdo the other. I was given the opportunity to have a handgun in the cockpit when I flew for United. I generally flew coast to coast, meaning that I had a lot of fuel on-board and that made my plane a pretty big bomb if it were to be used to fly into a building. I declined. Too many hoops to jump through and besides, with the new cockpit doors that were put on all aircraft (and not to mention the air marshals), I felt very secure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imp
We have guns too oldman, and get out in the woods a couple of times a year for some fun target practice. I don't conceal carry, but would someday if I felt the need to, haven't had a desire to yet.
 
For those afraid to go anywhere in the US because of gun ownership for regular citizens. You can go just about anywhere you want and be perfectly safe. Most of us do this everyday with no problems at all. It has become a way over hyped idea that the US is unsafe all the time and everywhere.

I have stayed in Chicago, some years back, visiting my wife's family. When we would leave a house, say north Chicago suburbs and head south to other family members, we were told by a cousin then a Chicago policeman, to be aware of suspicious actions, leave space between us and the car ahead so we can turn and get gone. Especially important at stop lights. Don't get trapped so you can not maneuver and run away if someone tries to break into the car while waiting for the light.

Anyway, none of the times when visiting the Chicago area were we in trouble. We did see drug selling going on. We did apply our cousins advice at stop signs and traffic lights. We visited lots of Chicago's high lights by also having to drive through some low light areas. It can be done everyday and is done everyday by thousands of folks.

We are in general a very safe place to live and visit if from out of town or from another country.
 
One of the main attractions of this forum for me is getting the views of people outside of my own country, whether approving or disapproving. So call 'em as you see 'em. Please! I wish we had more countries represented here.
Having lived in the US for 82 years, I have never witnessed a gun incident or had a friend or family member become a victim.
Still; looking at a number of seemingly untouchable cultural attitudes here, it is my considered opinion that taken as a whole, we are nuts!
I wish we had more countries represented on this forum too.
 
For those afraid to go anywhere in the US because of gun ownership for regular citizens. You can go just about anywhere you want and be perfectly safe. Most of us do this everyday with no problems at all. It has become a way over hyped idea that the US is unsafe all the time and everywhere.

I have stayed in Chicago, some years back, visiting my wife's family. When we would leave a house, say north Chicago suburbs and head south to other family members, we were told by a cousin then a Chicago policeman, to be aware of suspicious actions, leave space between us and the car ahead so we can turn and get gone. Especially important at stop lights. Don't get trapped so you can not maneuver and run away if someone tries to break into the car while waiting for the light.

Anyway, none of the times when visiting the Chicago area were we in trouble. We did see drug selling going on. We did apply our cousins advice at stop signs and traffic lights. We visited lots of Chicago's high lights by also having to drive through some low light areas. It can be done everyday and is done everyday by thousands of folks.

We are in general a very safe place to live and visit if from out of town or from another country.

Chicago is no different or worse than other large metropolitan area.. There are inner city neighborhoods where poverty is rampant... inviting drug dealing and gangs.. As a native of a large city, you learn what areas are and are not advisable to visit.. and if you have to ... you learn when go, what time of day, and how to stay safe. Generally, gangs have no interest in passers by... They are concerned with other gangs and protecting their turf and selling drugs.. unfortunately...( and you can ask any Chicago cop, and I know quite a few,) gang members are notoriously BAD shots... they aim one way and shoot another.. this is why they end up hitting unintended targets..
 
I have guns in my home and from time to time, my son and I will go to the range and try to outdo the other. I was given the opportunity to have a handgun in the cockpit when I flew for United. I generally flew coast to coast, meaning that I had a lot of fuel on-board and that made my plane a pretty big bomb if it were to be used to fly into a building. I declined. Too many hoops to jump through and besides, with the new cockpit doors that were put on all aircraft (and not to mention the air marshals), I felt very secure.
Glad you posted that oldman, you answered some things I've been wondering about. I especially like the idea of air marshals on board. Did you happen to see the movie Bridesmaids? It has a very funny scene between Melissa McCarthy and (her real life husband) an air marshal. :)
 
Here is an interesting twist.

What if the sellers of firearms were held responsible for their stock being sold to straw buyers who on sell to people who shouldn't have guns?

http://www.wisconsingazette.com/wisconsin/trial-against-wisconsin-gun-shop-enters-final-week.html

The court has decided against the gun sellers. I'm sure there will be an appeal.

Gun Control Advocates Eye a New Strategy: Taking Firearms Dealers to Court

Josh Sanburn
Oct. 14, 2015


ap_3556868931101.jpg
Mike De Sisti—APBrew City Shooter's Supply Inc., formerly known as Badger Guns, in Milwaukee, on Jan. 10, 2011.A rare legal victory raises hopes for future cases

The jury decision finding a Wisconsin gun seller liable for selling a firearm that was used to shoot two police officers is a rare legal victory for gun control advocates that could open a new front in the nation’s contentious fight over the right to bear arms.

A jury on Tuesday held that Badger Guns, a Milwaukee firearms seller, was liable for the wounding of two Milwaukee police officers in 2009 after it sold a gun to a straw purchaser, who bought the weapon on behalf of someone else. The gun was purchased by 21-year-old Jacob Collins and given to 18-year-old Julius Burton, who was too young to buy a firearm. One month later, Burton shot and wounded officers Bryan Norberg and Graham Kunisch. Burton is now serving 80 years in prison while Collins spent two years behind bars.

Until recently, few cases have held gun dealers responsible for selling a firearm linked to a crime. Only two have reached a jury since 2005, when Congress passed the Protection for Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which provides broad immunity for gun sellers and was strongly supported by the National Rifle Association. Earlier this summer, a similar lawsuit found that an Alaska gun seller was not liable for a firearm it had sold that was later used in a 2006 murder.

But about 10 other lawsuits are currently in the works, including another suit against Badger Guns brought by two other Milwaukee officers who were shot with guns bought from the store, says Jonathan Lowy, the director of legal action at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. And the Milwaukee ruling could open the door for even more.

“Litigation is one of the most promising avenues to save lives,” Lowy said. “Any victory that’s achieved in court is going to inspire and help the movement to prevent gun violence, and this latest victory is certainly a very important one.”

The Brady Campaign has filed suits in Indiana, New York, Pennsylvania and Florida in cases involving straw purchases. The suits come at a time of increased attention on the federal law that grants gun sellers broad protections from liability. Since the mass shooting at Umpqua Community College on Oct. 1 that left 10 dead, Hillary Clinton has said she would work to repeal PLCAA if elected president.

“Does this lawsuit immediately make it easy to sue a gun dealer?” said Adam Skaggs, senior counsel for Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control advocacy group. “No. But I think it’s focused people’s attention on this federal immunity law. And we’ll continue to see lawsuits because it’s not an uncommon occurrence that these sorts of sales occur within a small percentage of rogue gun dealers that don’t follow the law.”

The tactic will face another significant test in an upcoming case in Missouri. The Brady Center is suing a Missouri pawn shop that sold a gun to Colby Sue Weathers, who shot and killed her father after her mother called the store and asked it not to sell her daughter a firearm. Weathers had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and previously purchased a gun with the intent to commit suicide. The Brady Center argues that the store was negligent in selling Weathers the firearm and is liable in her father’s death. The case will likely be heard in front of the Supreme Court of Missouri in early 2016.

Due to the federal protections provided by the PLCAA, it can be difficult to prove the negligence of gun sellers. Plaintiffs have to prove that dealers knowingly sold a firearm to someone who is barred from owning a gun. In Alaska, plaintiffs were unable to show that Ray Coxe, a local gun dealer, knowingly sold a gun illegally to Jason Coday, who in 2006 placed $200 on a counter at Coxe’s gun store and left with a rifle. Coday, who would have failed a background check, later killed 26-year-old Simone Kim with the firearm, but Coxe wasn’t considered liable for his death.

The jury awarded the wounded officers nearly $6 million in compensatory and punitive damages. There will be an appeal.
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/wa...adger-guns-lawsuit-b99596217z1-332567372.html
 
Putting it in perspective... I think this opinion piece does just that. It is from a newish publication - Huffington Post Australia http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dale-hansen/nra-isnt-serious-about-st_b_8295770.html?ir=Australia

I think the writer counters many of the NRA's arguments with logic and some pertinent statistics. I have not checked the validity of those stats but they seem to be in accordance with stats I have looked up previously. The one about 133 of 166 mass shootings occurring the US since the turn of the century being disproportionate to the US population is new to me.

Bobf, please pay attention to the argument about Switzerland and the low rate of gun violence. Perhaps you could find out exactly what the Swiss restrictions are and consider whether they might be beneficial in the US to reduce the number of mass shootings.

NRA Isn't Serious About Stopping Gun Violence

Posted: 15/10/2015

The senseless shootings at Umpqua Community College in Oregon has left Americans with many questions. The biggest of which is how can we prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future. Despite this shared goal, the resulting discussions have exposed just how deep the divide is when it comes to mass shootings. For instance, while the President spoke about improving gun control, many gun advocates lamented the politicization of this tragedy. Instead they wanted to talk about how this might be the work of Islamist terrorist or how it could be an example ofChristians persecution. How dare the President politicize this shooting?!

Of course the hypocrisy doesn't end there. While being outraged by the president's belief that guns are somehow tied to the high level of gun violence in America, gun advocates were quick to trot out their standard list of memes which include, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people," "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," and, "Nearly all mass murders occur in gun free zones."

Unfortunately, none of these diversionary tactics actually does anything to stop gun violence; so in order to pretend that they are serious about addressing the extraordinary number of mass shootings in the U.S., gun advocates have turned their attention to the crisis in mental health.

Oddly, their concern for mental health only really extends to American mass shooters. If a Muslim kills people, gun advocates are some of the first people to condemn Islam because, while guns don't kill people, apparently Islam does. If an African-American kills people, they are quick to insinuate that black people are inherently more violent, using terms like "black on black crime" and "thugs."

If a cop unjustifiably kills people, gun advocates see it as a very black and white issue where the cops were just doing their job, yet as many as 1 in 8 police officers suffer from PTSD, while every year around 150 cops commit suicide.

Their concern over mental health is justified; however, the application of their concern seems very self-serving. The U.S. is hardly unique when it comes to metal health issues, yet statistics show that in an analysis of mass murders in 13 nations, the U.S. accounts for 133 of the 166 mass shootings that have occurred since the turn of the century despite having 1/6th as many people as the other 12 nations in the study.

The problem is, that for far too many gun advocates there is no difference between government programs aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and a full repeal of the second amendment. In fact, this NRA sponsored fear mongering of portraying any new gun laws as an excuse to confiscate "some or all guns" seems to have been part of the reason why the Oregon shooter had easy access to such an extensive arsenal given that his mother told colleagues she "wanted to get all the guns she could before someone outlawed them."

So rather than discuss laws to close any of the loopholes that allow criminals or the mentally ill to obtain guns such as limits to straw purchases, regulations to track gun inventories, or expanding background checks to private sales, gun advocates pretend that all gun control measures fail.

They'll point to Chicago as proof that gun control doesn't work, but ignore data that show states and countries with stricter gun controls have less gun related deaths. They'll claim gun regulations some support in America are akin to the gun control of Nazi Germany, but avoid talking about the astounding low rates of gun deaths in Japan which has arguably some of the strictest gun control in the world. In response to countries with successful gun control, they'll assert that you can't compare the U.S. to other countries; yet, in the same breath they'll hold up Switzerland as an example of how increased gun ownership leads to lower death rates. They'll make this case in spite of the fact that Swiss gun laws contain a number of restrictions that gun advocates in the U.S. oppose.

The problem is, that while Americans continue to talk about preventing mass shootings and gun deaths, the solution coming from gun advocates is to do nothing. Despite the fact that the U.S. has more guns per capita than any other country, by a wide margin, the NRA continues to insist that more guns equal less violence.

The NRA has thrown its support behind legislation that is supposed to improve the reporting of mental health issues; however, analysis of the bill's language shows that it actually makes it easier for unstable individuals to purchase a gun.

But by far the biggest indication of how serious groups like the NRA are about preventing gun violence is their stance that video games and television are to blame. Outside of the fact that evidence doesn't support this claim, if video games and television have this sort of corrosive power, then the NRA should take a quick look at the sort of things gun advocates are telling their children. Because if this is your idea of a rational response to gun laws, then perhaps you are not mentally fit to own a gun.


Gun%2BNuts.jpg


Follow Dale Hansen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DaleHansenDNews
 
Bobf, please pay attention to the argument about Switzerland and the low rate of gun violence. Perhaps you could find out exactly what the Swiss restrictions are and consider whether they might be beneficial in the US to reduce the number of mass shootings.

A few years back I was watching the Swiss guns and ways with them. Maybe they have changed by now. Back then they had no problems with guns in the homes. Many were of military assigned but they could also have personal guns, and many of those would be the ones the military might sell to them after their service was done. There were no problems with them having weapons visible while riding public transportation or when entering restaurants for meals. The communities held gun days and everyone that wanted to would show up for gun matches.

I will have to relook at the Swiss ways with weapons, they may have changed. But in two years or so, I doubt it would be much. In the US it is not big deal for anyone but the dedicated anti gun folks and there are some of those. But not enough to make it an issue in our Congress. Even many of our legislators are gun collectors and shooters.

And as I keep saying, in the US our gun problems are reducing in rates, so we must be on the right track.
 
Your rate of mass shootings is certainly not falling. It's getting worse over time.
This is the problem that really needs some serious consideration IMO.
For this issue I do not think you can say that you are on the right track.
 
Firearms Dealers vs. Private Sales

Perhaps many gun dealers will cease doing business after precedence is set as outlined above.

We (friends, relatives) have always made it a point when purchasing a firearm of doing so via private transaction. That particular act is not illegal, and may never be made so, according to some experts. There is risk inherent in such buying. An arm obtained privately might have been stolen, or used in the commission of a crime. OTOH, police routinely run serial number checks of firearms in use at sporting events, private target shoots, and at shooting ranges. The arms they check are in the hands of private individuals; presumably, used guns offered for sale by dealers have already been thusly checked.

Now, once back outside of Phoenix, a friend and I were target shooting at the base of Carver Mountain, about 1/2 mile from my home. A County cop drove up from the road below, and told us a call had been made complaining of shooting. I pointed out to him that the closest inhabited dwelling was farther away than 1/4 mile, the specific legal call-out in State Law. He agreed we were not breaking the law, but required us to allow him to run our serial numbers.

The problem with that is this: What if? What if he lies, or mistakenly enters digits incorrectly, and claims my gun had been reported stolen at some point in time? He then has recourse to, minimally, confiscate, maximally, charge me with a crime. OTOH, let's say I bought my gun from an individual whom I did not know, and HE had obtained it through theft. What makes that particular gun any different from one I bought from a dealer? If thieves stole, let's say, your PIANO, while you were away on vacation, would as large a fuss be raised as would have, had a gun been stolen? Probably not.

As far as I can tell, the issues with firearms will NEVER be resolved. This belief is supported by having learned that in non-gun Australia, hooligans are still in possession, and use them to shoot at buildings. imp
 
Your rate of mass shootings is certainly not falling. It's getting worse over time.
This is the problem that really needs some serious consideration IMO.
For this issue I do not think you can say that you are on the right track.
I aint reedin this stuff about guns no more--it's for Americans ONLY, not OUTSIDERS!
 
  • Like
Reactions: imp
Susie I applaud your decision not to read any more but I disagree with your restriction on posters.

chris_lane.jpg

Christopher Lane was an outsider but he was still shot in the back while jogging in Duncan, Oklahoma by three "bored" teenagers who decided to kill someone for fun. He's just as dead an American victims.
 
Your rate of mass shootings is certainly not falling. It's getting worse over time.
This is the problem that really needs some serious consideration IMO.
For this issue I do not think you can say that you are on the right track.

Show me proof of that and I will look for the stats I was referring too.
 
In 2013. The boys were charged and have been tried.

You wouldn't remember because he was just another victim out of so many but we remember because he was one of ours and was showing so much promise as an athlete and sportsman. Also, he was a lovely young man. And it was so senseless.
 
Show me proof of that and I will look for the stats I was referring too.

Challenge accepted. As I look around I'll post anything of interest I come across.

Here is the first bit. It indicates the proportion of guns used in mass shootings (usually defined as 4 or more victims) that were obtained legally. I haven't seen this before so I'm sharing it.

Overwhelmingly the majority of guns used in mass shootings were legally obtained.

legal guns.JPG

Still looking for the stats you were asking about.
 


Back
Top