What, now you're dis-whatevering *all* my comments, even those on other stories?

Mod-drama indeed. How pedantic and unneccessary.

Doesn't matter, at least people got to read my rebuttal before you decided to step on it.

#308 (fnny)

" wndr wh mng s, wh nw wlks th lvng rth, wll nt s Jnry 1st 2009 - bcs 't s mprtnt fr rdnry ctzns t wn nw mchn gns'"

Nt sngl n, nd 'll bt mny n t.

Thr r xctly 333,320 mchngns n cvln hnds, nd thy'v bn rgstrng nd trckng thm snc 1934. n ths 74 yrs, thr hs bn prcsly tw mrdrs cmmttd wth lglly wnd mchngn, nd n f th mrdrrs ws plc ffcr mnlghtng s htmn.

Wth cpl nmbrs fnd hr:

http://www.gnct.cm/gn_cntrl_gcfll.html

'd sy bt 1/3 f 1 prcnt f th gns szd frm crmnls r mchngns. Sttstcs n mchngn mrdrs (vn ncldng ths wth llgl gns) r s vnshngly rr tht th nmbrs rprsnt sttstcl crsty mr thn nythng ls.

T smmrz, lgl mchngns n pblc hnds ps zr thrt t pblc sfty.

N n s dvctng tht w lt crmnls by mchngns, slly. Bt thr's ls n rsn nt t rcgnz tht lw-bdng ppl hv rght t wn thm - nd s hs bn shwn, thy'r prtty drn rspnsbl wth thm.

ps. Ws tht nt th nswr y wntd? :)

"n lss thn yr, th bsc pltcl lndscp wll shft. W'll s."

ndd, thgh whch wy s hrd t tll t th mmnt. Bt th Hllr cs wll b n by thn, wth hpflly fw 2nd mndmnt ncrprtn css chllngng th Chcg hndgn bn, th NYC vrtl bn, th Clfrn "sslt wpns" bn, nd th fdrl prhbtn n ctzns wnng nw mchngns. Hpflly, t lst n f ths wll gt thrgh bfr w hv frrm bgt n th Wht Hs gn (f vr).

"n, bt f w md t hrdr fr smn wth lng hstry f rrspnsbl r crmnl s f gns t btn thm, thn w rgbly hvn't vltd th mndmnt t ll"

Bt sch lws hv bn shwn by CDC stdy t b nffctv nywy.

Rlly.

http://www.cdc.gv/mmwR/prvw/mmwrhtml/rr52142.htm

(nd th fct tht th cppd t wth "nsffcnt vdnc" t dtrmn ffccy s tllng. Ths ws th lrgst nd mst cmprhnsv stdy f gn cntrl lws vr dn, nd thy fnd nthng. f thy hd, y wld hv hrd t crwd frm th rftps.)

^^^srry, tht shld b rl stt pls fnnc/bnkng, mstk thr.

"qstnbl lbbyng nd brbry trck t thwrt th dmcrtc wll f th mjrty t chng th lw."

Lk wht, spcfclly? Y d rlz tht th prft mrgns n th gn mnfctrng ndstry r rzr-thn (4% s cmmn), tht th NTR frrms mnfctrng ndstry cmbnd n th S hs grss ncm lss thn hlf f McDnlds' (ys, rlly), nd tht th gn ndstry tslf hs vrtlly n pltcl nflnc t ll s rslt? Gn mnfctrng nd gn rghts rgs CMBND nly gv $2.7 mlln t cnddts n 2002, cmprd wth jst n cmpny, Lckhd Mrtn, tht gv $2.4 mlln ll by tslf tht cycl! Th dfns ndstry gv $16,237,888, th hlthcr ndstry gv $95,438,510, th rl stt ndstry gv $233,218,247 (hly fck!) t l. n fct, gn rghts pls gn mnfctrrs wr #67 vrll mng ll ndstrs nd grps n th 2002 cycl, nd rnkd jst bhnd *dry frmrs* n trms f pltcl nflnc!

gn, gn mnfctrrs nd gn rghts rgs hv vrtlly nl pltcl nflnc, nd s 'v shwn, tlkng bt thm s f thy r sm hg mnlth byng pltcns lft nd rght s cmpltly ldcrs t ll lvls.

"Th gn lbby s nt-dmcrcy."

r y kddng? wnng nd crryng gns s fndmntlly gltrn, fmnst, prgrssv, dmcrtc, nd Dmcrtc ct.

Lbrls nd lftsts lk m knw tht cn n mr rg fr gn cntrl thn rg fr "clrds nly" wtr fntns nd lws prhbtng gy mrrg. t's rl trvsty tht th gn cntrl lbl gt pstd n lbrls - *W* s pr-cvl rghts lbrls shld b th ns knwn s prsrvng frrms rghts!

(nt: w'r wrkng n t. n th lst rnds f lctns, w btd 2-3 nt-gn Rpblcn gvrnrs nd rplcd thm wth pr-gn Dms.

Why lbrls shld lv th 2nd mndmnt
http://www.dlyks.cm/strynly/2008/4/21/19133/5152

" nvr gt ths bzrr mrcn tttd f "wht r ncstrs wrt mst b rght". t's kn t th Brtsh dbtng htdly vr whthr Wllngtn wld hv bn pr-nks r nt."

m, nt s mch. Y s sly dsmss thr wrtngs, bt thr "wrtngs" hppn t b *th lw*. Thy s ppl d nt nd nvr hv mbdd th lw thmslvs. Ys, thy wrt pnns nd dtrls, bt thy ls wrt lws, nd ths lws r stll n frc ntl thy r rpld.

Th lw sys wht t sys: "Shll nt b nfrngd". nd ntl tht lw s rpld, t stnds - nd nt bcs "m, wht r ncstrs wrt s crrct n mttr wht", t's bcs *t's th lw*.

llwng lws tht prtct rghts t "chng wth th tms" wtht dly gng thrgh th lgl prcss t chng r rpl ths lws lds t... wll, Brtn.

Wll, s pr-chc ppl lk m sy: " rght dlyd s rght dnd".

"y mght rg tht sttng th stndrds fr btnng gns nrsnbly hgh s d fct nfrngmnt n th rght t kp nd br rms, bt tht clm sn't splld t nywhr r xplctly spprtd by ny lngg n th bll f rghts."

t's nt vr gng t b splld t n th lw, t nds t b splld t n th crts.

Th prblm hr s n f wht bss tst s ppld t th 2nd - strct scrtny r rtnl bss. Th 1st mndmnt hs strct scrtny - tht s, y cn't hv lcnss t spk frly, nr hv wtng prds n pblshng smthng, bcs tht nfrngs th rght.

Rtnl bss mns tht ll th gvrnmnt hs t d s sy tht "wll, thr's rsn" nd pf yr 2nd rghts r gn.

Hllr s nt gng t b th SCTS cs tht dcds th bss tst nr ncrprtn, thy smply r gng t dclr n ndvdl rght, thn thr frthcmng css r ndd fr ncrprtn nd bss.

n thr wrds, t's lng rd t h t gt cnsrvtv nd bgtd stts lk Clfrn nd Nw Jrsy t stp nfrngng n ppl's 2nd mndmnt rghts, jst lk t tk lng tm t gt rcst schl dstrcts n lbm nd Msssspp t stp schl sgrgtn nd gt rd f clrd wtr fntns.

"Mny, mny thr mrcns lk t th Bll f Rghts nd n gd cnscnc rch vry dffrnt cnclsns sng thr wn jdgmnt bt wht ds nd dsn't vlt th lttr r th sprt f th 2nd mndmnt"

h, th "Grg W. Bsh" tst, h? Whn yr tst s ppld t th 2nd, t gts ppld t th 4th, 5th, tc. nd w gt llgl dtntns, wtrbrdng, mltry trbnls nstd f trls, tc.

Bsh s ndbtdly gld fr ppl wh thnk tht ndvdl "gd cnscnc" nd "jdgmnt" bt wht ds nd ds nt vlt th Cnstttn s K.

gh.

"s fr s cn tll, y hvn't ffrd ny spcfc, clr gdlns fr jdgng wht ds r dsn't vlt th sprt f th 2nd mndmnt."

hv. ny wpn r smlr n rmy stndrd ss fr ndvdl sldrs s prtctd. thrs r nt nd cn b rgltd. Ths s spprtd clrly by th Mlt ct - mdrn hndgns nd rfls r ncssry t mlt, cnnns nd rtllry nd nks r nt.

t's vry clr, dn't s wht th prblm s.

Th rlvnt txt frm th 1792 Mlt ct:

"Tht vry ctzn, s nrlld nd ntfd, shll, wthn sx mnths thrftr, prvd hmslf wth gd mskt r frlck, sffcnt bynt nd blt, tw spr flnts, nd knpsck, pch, wth bx thrn, t cntn nt lss thn twnty fr crtrdgs, std t th br f hs mskt r frlck, ch crtrdg t cntn prpr qntty f pwr nd bll; r wth gd rfl, knpsck, sht-pch, nd pwr-hrn, twnty blls std t th br f hs rfl, nd qrtr f [pnd] f [pwdr]"

nd bcs ll ml S ctzns 17-45 nt n th rmd frcs r n th mlt ndr SC 10.311:

"() Th mlt f th ntd Stts cnssts f ll bl-bdd mls t lst 17 yrs f g nd, xcpt s prvdd n sctn 313 f ttl 32, ndr 45 yrs f g wh r, r wh hv md dclrtn f ntntn t bcm, ctzns f th ntd Stts nd f fml ctzns f th ntd Stts wh r mmbrs f th Ntnl Grd.
(b) Th clsss f th mlt r—
(1) th rgnzd mlt, whch cnssts f th Ntnl Grd nd th Nvl Mlt; nd
(2) th nrgnzd mlt, whch cnssts f th mmbrs f th mlt wh r nt mmbrs f th Ntnl Grd r th Nvl Mlt."

Thrfr w'r ll n th mlt, nd w ll nd t prcr mdrn rfls lk flly tmtc M16s nd sffcnt mm - nt rtllry, SMs, nd nks, slly.

Wll, plcs lk trvlng n rpln trps t plcs tht gns r frbddn lck t n stl bx tht s ttchd t my cr frm, thn cn pt t n gn whn gt bck n th cr ftr my trp.

Plcs lk th ntrr f crthss, sm thng.

thrws, th sfst plc fr n's frrm s n n's hp whr t's n n's cmplt cntrl. Pttng t n lckd bx s scnd bst. N gn wnr knw jst lvs t p n shlf, nd dn't thr.

Plcs lk ppl's hms t prty r smthng ( dn't drnk whl crryng, f crs), y'd prbbly b shckd t hr ths, jst crry thr lk t ws my cll phn. 'm lcnsd, chckd, nd fngrprntd sx wys frm Sndy wth th stt nd FB nywy, s t sk ndvdl prmssn frm vry prsn t th prty (" m crryng gn lglly. Pls chck th bx ndctng pprvl r dspprvl, nd whthr y wsh m t lv t bhnd.") s jst ldcrs. "Cncld wpn" mns jst tht. Sm ppl gt frkd t by wpns ll t f prprtn t th dngr psd, nd cn vr crt dngr t thmslvs nd thrs. f 'm spndng th nght thr, wll f crs ntfy thm.

f str psts sgn syng "N Gns" (whch f crs nly th lw-bdng wll lstn t nywy), n my stt ths sgns dn't hv th frc f lw, s try nt t ptrnz ths bsnsss wth my dllrs, bt 'll crry nt thm f rlly nd smthng. Thy cn nly sk m t lv f thy s my pstl, mrly wlkng n crryng sn't crmnl ct.

Tht's rght, t's nt th 2. Bt t prtty clrly splls t wht "mlt rms" r - ndvdl wpns. rgng tht rdnnc s prtctd by th 2nd s prtty slly.

N, n gn ccdnts. Nt sngl rnd tchd ff tht ddn't g whr t ws ntndd. Whn strtd crryng gn cpl yrs g, md pldg t myslf tht f vr nglgntly pt rnd nt th flr r smthng by ccdnt, tht dy 'd gt rd f thm ll. Thr's n rm fr ccdnts n my bk. f crs, 'd nvr spprt lw rqrng ths (s *lt* f plc nd mltry wld b t f jbs), t's smply my wn prsnl stndrd.

h, nd th dgrm s wrng. Mst f th cll phn gns r md n Ygslv nd hv vry shrt brrls. 'v sn svrl mdls nd nn f thm lk lk ths dgrm.

Whn t cms t gns, 'll dmt tht 'm prtty CD bt sfty. chck th chmbrs f gns thr tms. nc by rckng th sld, nc by lkng, nd nc by stckng my pnky n. 'm ls qt CD bt nt nglgntly pntng th gn t ppl r thngs.

Mst gn wnrs knw r ths wy.

h, tht slly cll phn gn? Prbbly wldn't vn wnd y srsly. .22LR t f 0.5" brrl mght brk skn.

h, 'v lwys bn t s. t cms ntrlly t m. dn't fl ny dffrnt whn pt t n, t's jst smthng d.

ndd, t's gmbl. Lf s, nd s mch s w lk t grnt ttl frdm frm ccdnts nd crm, thy hppn. nd bcs 'm knd, rsnbly trnd, clm, t-s, ld-bck knd f prsn nd nt vlnt crmnl, 'm prbbly n f th sfst, mst nffnsv ppl t thr t b rnd.

gn, t's n dffrnt thn lvng n's cll phn bhnd. Y shld try lvng yr cll phn bhnd fr Jst. n. Dy. Y'll b hppr, hlthr, nd lss lkly t gt nt cr ccdnt. S why dn't y? Cn y lv t bhnd? r r y s ttchd t th flng t gvs y tht y'r pssssd by t nd cn't gv t p?

"wht hs chngd?"

Nthng. Sm dys dn't crry t, t's rndm. Jst lk y dn't crry yr cll phn r wllt wth y sm dys, nd y dn't mss t.

"ny lglly cnsstnt rgmnt fr 2nd mndmnt-bsd ndvdl rght t br rms, lgclly, shld ls pply t th rght t br nks, chmcl wpns, r ny thr rms th mltry mght hv ccss t. f w rn't prprd t ccpt tht n prncpl, thn w dn't rlly blv n th 2nd mndmnt n prncpl. t's tht smpl. thr y blv ndvdl mrcns hv n nhrnt rght t kp ny nd ll mltry rms--p t nd ncldng nclr nd blgcl wpns--r y nly blv mrcns hv n nhrnt rght t kp nd br rms n n mpty, symblc sns."

Nt rlly. Th Mlt ct f 1792 clrly splld t wht rms r prtctd - mdrn rfl, sffcnt mmntn, nd bynt, whch mltmn r sppsd t prvd fr thmslvs. t prtty sccssflly lys t wht rms r prtctd - mltry ndvdl wpns, whch hv bn th fndtn f vry mltry r rblln n hstry. Th mlt ct dsn't sy "brng cnnn" r ny thr rdnnc. t sys rfl nd mm.

rdnnc dsn't fll ndr thr th "mlt" cls f th 2nd, nr th 1792 Mlt ct, s t cn b rgltd. f crs, rdnnc lk rtllry, mrtrs, nd RPGs r lrdy lglly n th pssssn f rdnry ctzns f th S, ndr prmt - nd f crs n lgl prvtly wnd wpn f ths typ hs vr bn sd n ny crm by ctzn snc thy strtd trckng thm n 1934.

Np, n n tdy. :)

(dly wndrng whr ths gm f yrs s gng)

h, nd wnt bkng, vlntrd s yth mntr, wnt t wrk, wnt t th gym, nd wnt sls dncng. ll wtht crryng gn.

Dn. Dd s tdy. Whch thr vw f yrs d y wsh m t dpt?

" thrfr r-xtnd my rlr nvttn t y t r-xmn yr whl tlk n gns nd scl ntrctn."

Grt. 'll strt rght nw. Whch vw f yrs d y wsh m t dpt?

"ky, y'v sttd wht y thnk, nd ndrstnd t, s nw jst xpln t m why shld thnk t, t--wht rsns d y hv t spprt th clm tht th d bhnd th 2nd mndmnt sn't nvld nw tht th S mltry hs tnks, nks, nt-bllstc mssls, nd ll srts f thr rms w ll wllngly cncd w hv n rght t kp nd br?"

Tht's lk syng tht th rght f ppl t cntrbt t pltcl cmpgns dsn't mk sns nymr, bcs dfns cntrctrs nd l cmpns cn thrw wy mr mny t thm t th pnt tht r ndvdl lttl cntrbtns wn't mttr.

Th pnt s tht ppl mttr, n mttr hw smll. nd wpns systms r rn by ppl tht r stll sscptbl t vn lwly .38 whn thy'r nt n th drvr's st f thr tnk.

K, s wht's gd cmprms? Thgh m nt n xprt, d hv knwldg bt sbjct whr knwldg s srly lckng t BB.

Cmmntng n thr tpcs whr my pnn s lrdy shrd by BB jst trns BB nt n ch chmbr.

My cmmnts wr nfrmtv, tpcl, nd cvl. f thy rmn tht wy, wht ds t mttr wht tpcs r cvrd? f th rgnl pst nvlvs gns, s t nt lgcl t tlk bt th pst nvlvng gns n n's cmmnt?

Pls kndly rcnsdr.

wld sbmt tht th ct f sng f ppl wld rcgnz Lc's pntngs s bttr nd mr mprtnt rt thn hs pntngs thmslvs.

Cltrl pprctn "gtchs" lk ths lwys rb m th wrng wy. Th wrld f rt pprctn s s rrfd tht n cn't flt ppl fr nt rcgnzng "grt rt" - t's n ct f cltrl snbbry.

thnk tht cmpct vd rcrdrs r gng t bcm th nrm fr cps n th nxt fw yrs, nd tht t's gng t drm lt f bd cps t f jb.

Tlk t kds bt drgs s prnt. bk wn't mk wht f dffrnc.

Trs thght tht ws pstng "t mch" bt gns nd nt ngh bt thr thngs. BB rdrs r nfrmd bt thr thngs bt hrbr mch gnrnc bt frrms.

vdntly, t's nt ngh t b cvl, nfrmtv, nd thghtfl n n's psts - t's ls rqrd tht y hv t rgdly dstrbt yr psts qlly mng ll tpcs hr t BB, nd nt pst "t mch" bt ny n lst y gt yr psts rmvd.

n cn't pst mch t ll bt "MN mks Nrn pstr cl" r "lphnt phtgrphrs" thr thn "Cl!".

@214

"t's nt hrd fr m t cll p ll th cmmnt y'v vr pstd hr nd s th tny nmbr f cmmnts n thr tpcs bfr y rvrtd sldly t gns."

Wll, th BB cmmnty s qt gnrnt n gns s whl, nd thght wld b bl t cntrbt th mst thr, whr thr's ctlly smthng t tlk bt. Bttr tht thn m hvng 200 thr nn psts syng "cl pctr ZMG!" My cmmnts r tpcl, plt, thghtfl, nd nfrmtv. pprntly, tht's nt gd ngh.

Hgh-cmmnt thrds ls drv mr ppl t BB's dvrtsrs thn mpty cntnt lk "Fnny bckwrds bs d".

N gn wnr cndns th wrds f sfnk1x. Knck t ff.

3 mlln rnds f 7.62x39 s bt 60 tns, s 17 tns f thr mntns.

"Hll, f nyn hr knws ny Mrmns, why dn't y sk thm bt thr Rptr kts...."

Y m th scrds ndrwrz?

@138

"Bst t hv th stdy st p bfr hnd, wth wys t cnt th fd, mdcl cr nd shltr th mllns spnt n gns crts."

h, tht's sy:

Prvntn f thft f 1 gnrtr: $4000
Prvntn f thft f 2 wks f fd: $250
Prvntn f thft f pn mdctn: $150
Prvntn f dth: Prclss

:)

Frrms r n ssntl prt f dsstr prprdnss. knw tht n rdr t hlp thrs s m bnd t, cnnt b hlplss myslf.

Tht M16 mnl rlly shws hw bd th systm rlly ws.

"Tk cr y dn't s ths typ f rly mgzn!"

"Mk sr y hv ths nw frng pn rtntn, nt th ld n!"

tc., tc.

'll tk n K, thnks.

#130

" m fndng t dffclt t s th lnk. dn’t thnk tht th sm ( dn’t lk th wrd, cn smn hlp wth n ltrntv?) ‘Rmpg’ cn b sly cndctd wth nythng ls thr thn frrm?"

Thn y r nt thnkng ngh lk mss kllr (Ths s gd).

ny cmbntn f prpn, gsln, ntrl gs, NF, dsl fl, TTP, nls, bll brngs, TNT, RDX, PTN, HMX, cn b sly md t hm. nd mn *stpd sly*. Th prcdrs fr mkng ths thngs cn (nd r) dn by 15 yr lds. Dvcs cn b cnstrctd tht wll kll hndrds f ppl fr $50 t th hrdwr str. Lnrs prmdtt nd r ftn smrt.

f nythng, kllng ppl wth frrm s *hrd*. 80% f ths sht wth hndgn srvv t. 50% f ths sht wth rfl srvv t. Kllng wth bmbs s mr cst ffctv, sr, nd dsn't rqr skll.

Th grtst sngl-nstnc kllngs f ll tm r wth smpl bmbs, nt frrms.

Cnfsctng gns wll rdc mss kllngs wth gns. t wll d nthng t prvnt mss kllngs s whl.

#127

"My cmmnt wsn't sggstng pnc fr rdcng vlnt crm"

Y sd:

" knw t's tns, bt t (sms) t hv md thngs lttl sfr?"

Y crtnly wr sggstng pnc, by sggstng tht bnnng slf-ldng frrms cntrbtd t lss cvln mss shtngs.

t's bvs tht rdcng th nmbr f gns wll rdc th nmbr f shtngs. t wll nt ffct th vrll rt f mrdr t ll. Thrfr, t's flwd plcy.

nd f y bn gns, mss mrdrrs g t bmbs nstd, bt y knw tht lrdy.

@118 bdn

"thy r hppr bcs "thy rn 32% mr pr yr thn nn wnrs"."

xcpt tht f y ctlly rd th rtcl, y fnd tht thy nrmlzd fr ncm. Sgh.

@124 nll

"t s qt clr tht n th S gn cntrl s ll bt mpssbl, gvn th shr nmbrs nd yrs f th Rght t Br rms. t hs smd t wrk n th K (n sm fshn) frm th fllwng fcts:"

xcpt tht dd by sslt wth crckt bt s jst s dd s klld wth frrm. Yr sslt nd mrdr rts vrll hv gn p, whl sslt nd mrdr wth frrms hs gn dwn. Th nmbr f frrms ffcts th frrm sslt nd mrdr rt, dh. Hwvr, thr s n crrltn btwn th nmbr f frrms nd th vrll sslt r mrdr rt, whch s rlly wht y wnt t brng dwn. nly chngng yr cltr cn chng tht.

#121

xctly. Nmbr f frrms nly ffcts th frrm scd rt ndpndntly. S th ppr bt strn scd rts ctd bv. Rdc frrms, vrll scds g nwhr whl frrm scds g dwn.

#113

"W lkd lk mncs nd thy shldn't hv trstd s n nch, bt prdcng D nd crdt crd ws ll t tk t prcr rntd hndgns, mmntn nd rng tm fr ths thr wcky strngrs."

Cnsdrng tht th gn cmmnty s prtty tlrnt nd ccptng f ths wth ltrntv lfstyls, 'm nt srprsd t ll. sht wth Wccns, fmnsts, lsbns, mnrts, gy mn, tttd pnk rck frks wth spky hr, nd gths.

wld sbmt tht sn't t gd thng tht gn wnrs hv bn shwn t *nt* b th pr, nhppy, ndctd, ngry ppl tht s mny thnk thy r? Wldn't y thnk t's gd thng tht ppl wnng s mny wpns r rltvly hppy nd wll-djstd? r s t stll bd bcs t dsn't cnfrm t yr prjdcs?

@90

" wld rg tht thr r mr mprtnt sss tht cncrn qlty f lf fr th vrg mrcn thn th blty t gt crry prmt r wn n sslt rfl."

Ys, bt *n blnc*, btwn tw cnddts tht wnt nvrsl hlthcr, thnk kpng th nvrnmnt cln s gd thng, thnk gy mrrg s K, nd wnt t nd th wr, 'll pck th n tht prmss t kp thr cttnpckn' hnds T f my gn sf.

@100

" thght thy whp y wth stck whn y'r tryng t mdtt."

Sm schls sht y. Thy tnd t rn t f stdnts thgh.

@89

Hw ntlrnt f y. gh. Lbrls shldn't ct n sch bgtd, nbcmng mnnr.

Wll, tkn, gvn tht mst f th njrs nd dths n yr scnd vd r frm ntnl rms nd nt frm ndvdl ctzn-wnd wpns, 'd sy tht th ctzns cn b trstd wth ddly wpns mch mr thn stts cn. Smwhr btwn 18-20 tms s mny ppl hv bn klld by gvrnmnts thn by rdnry prsn-t-prsn mrdr.

http://www.mg.n/mpp/rmml/pwr.rt.htm

Thnks fr th scnd vd.

@82

Tht ws fnny!

@76

" tnd t wndr hw mny nn-gn wnrs t thr r nhppy spcfclly bcs thy r srrndd by ppl wh chs t hv gn rnd."

Lss ppl thn y wld prfr, prbbly. :P

"Bt th pnt s tht thy dstrct s frm th sss tht rlly mttr, tht hv th pwr t nt s twrd sltn, nd tht nfrtntly r mch mr dffclt t dfn."

dnn. Gvn bm nd Clntn's grgs nt-gn psts, t's t thr bnft t sy thngs tllng ppl "w shldn't b tlkng bt gns hr" - bcs tlkng bt gns cn nly hrt thm. t rmns t b sn f thy wll gn tk p th gn-bnnr flg f thy ttn hgh ffc. My mny s n "ys".

Gns mttr t m, tht's fr sr.

"pr-skb/nt-skb"

Y wn t th ntrnts fr qtng PBF. Kds.

ctlly, rtrct tht. f thr r 200 mlln gns nd 130 mlln gn wnrs, thn th nmbrs r s lrg s t mk th scd nmbrs hv nglgbl mpct t crt s mny mr hppy gn wnrs. Smthng ls s t wrk.

@68

"Gn-wnrshp jst sms mr lkly t b n xprssn f smthng ls tht ds crrlt t hppnss."

xctly. wnng gn dsn't mk y hppy, myb f y'r hppy y'r mr lkly t by gn. dnn.

d thnk tht Sstr Y hs pnt, n tht gn wnng ppl mght b mr sccssfl n kllng thmslvs whn thy chs t d s thn nn-gn-wnng ppl, s nhppy gn wnrs mght tnd t b bl t kll thmslvs t hghr rts thn vrg. Tht wld b n ntrstng thng t lk t, n Frknmcs knd f wy.

@69

S? Dd t hm s jst s dd s dd tsd. Wht's yr pnt?

@65

"h, nd tht 'prtct th hm' rgmnt: pr ndltrtd bllsht. ccdntl gn dths n th hm tnmbr sccssfl dfnss f th hm by rdrs f mgntd."

n 2005 thr wr 789 ccdntl frrm dths n ttl n th ntr S.

Dsn't t sm ldcrs tht thr wld b nly 7-8 dfnss f th hm wth frrms *n th ntr S* n tht yr, n rdr t mk yr sttmnt tr?

@61

"Gn wnrs hv 30% grtr chnc f dyng frm gn n th hm."

Src? f t's vrnt f th Kllrmn mthdlgy, t's bn dbnkd. Mst f th dcdnts n ths stds lv n vlnt nghbrhds nd hv flny rp shts. nd th stds dn't vn cntrl fr whthr th gn th dcdnt wnd s th n tht klld thm! Ldcrs xcss fr scnc.

"n n hs dfndd thr frdms wth thr gns."

http://www.clytncrmr.cm/gndfnsblg/blggr.html

Ct-nd-pstng msss f txt s nt n rgmnt, tkn. Y'r dltng th dscssn, n cld rg ntntnlly.

@50

Fr ngh, nd thnk thr's sm mt t tht. Th scnd mst ffctv mthd f scd s sffctn, nd th mthds t sffct nslf r mr wdsprd thn gns. S f th nhppy wr ffng thmslvs, nn gn wnrs wld b ffng thmslvs s wll.

Thr wr 15635 nn-frrm scds n 2005, cmprd t 17002 frrm scds.

f 34% f ppl n th S wn gns, nd thr r 17002 scds by gn (ll gn wnrs), nd 15635 nn-frrm scds, thn frrm scds wld rmv prprtnlly lrgr nhppy bt f th gn wnrs thn th nn-gn wnrs. Fr t t b wsh, thr wld b nly hlf th frrm scds s thr wr nn-frrm scds.

@hrrkv

blv tht th Dms s whl hv mr ptntl t trn th S rnd. spprt Dmcrts lk Bll Rchrdsn, pr-chc, pr-nvrnmnt lbrl wh stll crrs cncld hndgn ccsnlly.

@ntns

hv bn prtcptng n thr BB tpcs, sr.

@ndythbrt

n 2005, thr wr 807 frrm scds n tngrs n th S. n th sm tm prd, 758 tngrs klld thmslvs by sffctn. Shll w bn rps, grdn hss, nd ntrnl cmbstn ngns?

Th strns fnd tht th rt f frrm lcnss ws *hghly* crrltd wth th frrm scd rt, bt *ncrrltd* wth th vrll scd rt, n th ppr "Scd by shtng s crrltd t rt f gn lcnss n strn cnts".

RSLTS: W fnd strng crrltn btwn th vrg gn lcns rt fr th prd 1990-2000 nd scds by shtng (r = 0.967), nd nly vry wk crrltn, nd fr sm f th yrs ndr nvstgtn ngtv crrltn, wth thr mthds f cmmttng scd (r = 0.117) nd th scd rt n gnrl (r = 0.383).

prsn tht klls thmslvs wth gn s jst s dd s n tht klls thmslvs wth rp, bt w wn't cll t bn rps. nstd, w chng th cltr nd tlk t r chldrn s thy dn't thnk tht kllng thmslvs s smthng thy shld prs.

@tkn

Wht stblshd fct ws tht?

"y knw, th lst Sprbwl cld hv bn mmrbl. f h hdn't chngd hs mnd t th lst mnt nd trnd rnd...wll, 25 prpn cnstrs xpldng n pckd stdm, ths klld nd mmd n th pnc whn vryn trd t lv t nc whn th xplsns strtd....."

"y knw, th lst Sprbwl cld hv bn mmrbl. f h hdn't chngd hs mnd t th lst mnt nd trnd rnd...wll, 500,000 cbc ft f chlrn n pckd stdm, ths klld nd mmd n th pnc whn vryn trd t lv t nc whn th chkng strtd....."

"y knw, th lst Sprbwl cld hv bn mmrbl. f h hdn't chngd hs mnd t th lst mnt nd trnd rnd...wll, 10,000 vnms snks n pckd stdm, ths klld nd mmd n th pnc whn vryn trd t lv t nc whn th btng strtd....."

Sstr Y, th frrm s th mst ffctv mthd f scd, wth smthng lk 70% f frrm scd ttmpts sccdng. S f crs w'r gng t hv lt f ppl ffng thmslvs wth frrms, thy hppn t b ffctv. f smn wnts t ff thmslvs, lt thm d t. Mst ppl try mltpl tms t kll thmslvs bfr sccdng. Hvng gn n th hm jst mns tht scdl prsn s gng t hv t try lss tms t kll thmslvs bfr sccdng. Ppl hv th rght t nd thr wn lf.

MH, th whl "bn th gns t sv scdrs" rgmnt s cmplt nn-strtr.

s rgstrd Dmcrt wh wns n K-47 nd shts n cmbt pstl/rfl mtchs, fnd trgt shtng qt rlxng nd mdttv. n cnnt b cncrnd wth nythng thr thn prtng th wpn - nt th dy's vnts, nt n's wrk. Jst y nd th trgt. Flw stt, s sggstd bv.

nd t's nt ncm, s th stdy crrctd fr tht:

"Smlrly, hldng ncm cnstnt, n stll fnds tht gn wnrs r hppst."

dn't fnd th stdy srprsng. Gn wnrshp s n mpwrng thng, nd mpwrd ppl tnd t b hppy ppl.

t hs ls bn fnd tht chldrn tht wn lgl gns hv lwr jvnl dlnqncy rts thn chldrn tht dn't wn gns. Crrltn nt cstn, f crs.

http://www.ncjrs.gv/pdffls/rdl.pdf (p. 25)

Nn,

Clmt chng hs hppnd n th pst, nd thrfr t's rsnbl t prpr fr t n th ftr.

Ppl r ntrsly shrt trm thnkrs. f sllng ppl n nthrpgnc glbl wrmng s wht s ncssry t rs th mny v txs t py fr nfrstrctr mprvmnts, thm 'm ll fr t. gn. t dsn't mttr wht th scnc sys bt nthrpgnc wrmng. Wht mttrs s tht t wll hppn, hmn-csd r nt, nd w nd t prpr fr t.

'm n fvr f ny thry tht sys hmns cs glbl wrmng, bcs t's th nly wy y'r gng t b bl t cnvnc ppl t py fr *ncssry* nfrstrctr t cmbt ts ffcts. Whthr w hmns ctlly cs glbl wrmng s rrlvnt. Th fct s t ds hppn nd hs hppnd n th pst.

"Tmptrs n rth hv nly bn rsng fr bt 50 yrs."

http://pld.wkmd.rg/wkpd/cmmns/f/f8/c_g_Tmprtr.png

"Lst yr's tlkng pnts clld th whl clmt chng thng hx ckd p by clmtlgsts wh wntd t scr ppl nt gvng thm grnt mny."

Flr f cmpstn. Fl.

Clmt chng hs hppnd n th pst. Vstly lvtd C2 lvls hv hppnd n th pst.

W nd strtgy t dl wth th fct tht th ss *wll* rs nd th tmprtrs *wll* bcm wrmr. Prd.

gn, t dsn't mttr f th scnc s crrct, t mttrs hw mny ppl y cn cnvnc th scnc s crrct. Y cn't tx th sn. Y cn't mk lws rstrctng vlcns. Bt y cn tx crs nd rstrct ppl.

cld cr lss, dn't vn wn cr.

Hlpng thrs hs nvr bn ncmptbl wth slf-rspnsblty. Ths shld b bvs.

Cry, fr shm. "Dnlsts"? Snc whn ds scnc s trms brrwd frm rlgs rthdxy?

Clmt chng s hppnng. Whthr t s drct rslt f hmn mssns f C2 s ndr stdy. Glbl wrmng s stdy hs bn gng n fr 40 yrs t th mst. T lvt th cnclsns rchd n th lst 40 yrs f stdy t sttld fct s prmtr.

'm wth th bv. Glbl wrmng hs bn c-ptd by sttsts nd cmmntrns s n xcs t tx nd rglt. t dsn't mttr nymr f th scnc s crrct, t mttrs hw mny ppl y cn cnvnc tht th scnc s crrct.

" wll r-trt tht thr s n ncssry cnflct wth n ndvdlst hlpng thrs - vn t thr wn dtrmnt."

xctly.

nd th pnt tht 'm tryng t mk t Cmmslngr hr s tht f w bdct scrty t gvrnmnt srvcs nd nglct t rslvs, w wll crtnly fl sfr bt wll b n sfr (r lss). f w tk rspnsblty fr rslvs nd thrs *s ndvdls*, mnng f s smn hlp, nd kp myslf sf, thn wll *fl* lss sf (mstly bcs 'm pyng ttntn t ptntl thrts rnd m), bt nd thrs wll n fct *b* sfr.

Strw mn, tkn. Syng "Gttch! wn!" dsn't mk t s.

Rscng smn n frzng lk rqrs mmdt ctn wthn 2 mnts. Cllng 911 nd wtng wll rslt n y bng dd. Rmmbr, whn y nd ssstnc rght nw, th plc/fr/MS s nly 15 mnts wy.

Rscng smn frm frzn lk s smpl nd rqrs vry lttl skll r qpmnt.

Prhps y nd t pck n xmpl mr std t yr frgn cnclsn?

f crs, 'm nt syng tht plc nd MS srvcs rn't ncssry - vn thgh 90% f th tm thy rrv t lt t d mch. 'm syng tht scrty nd sfty lwys lwys lwys strts wth th prvt ctzn, nd f n bdcts tht, y'll fl sf bt nt b sf.

f crs nt. Bcs scrty nd sfty r n ndvdl rspnsblty, wll jmp n t sv y rthr thn cllng 911 t "cntrct t" th srvc.

Tkn,

Tht's hw rspnsblty gts bdctd - by "cntrctng t" scrty t mk y fl sf. Scrty s n ndvdl rspnsblty, prd.

Schnr's cmmnts r ls pplcbl t mst frms f gn cntrl.

"f w mk gn cntrl dcsns bsd n th flng f sfty rthr thn th rlty, w chs lws tht mks s fl mr sf vr lws tht ctlly mks s mr sf."

Don't most hotels have these now?

N n s dvctng tht vryn shld wn gn.

Th hrdrssr s bvsly n dt nd dsrvs prsn.

"tk knf, st th bllt n th tbl, gngrly ct shllw crss n th ns f th ld. Th cnmy vrsn. h, nd fnl stp: gt cght by th thr sd wth thm nd b slwly ct t pcs wth bynts. Spry gl nd glttr fr th tp, msk th brss wth tp."

xcpt tht dsn't wrk. Cmmrclly md hllwpnts wrk qt wll.

"JLBrn s gn trll wh nly xsts t pst nflmmtry cmmnts n gn rltd psts. "

Cnsdrng hw shckngly ntlrnt th ppl r hr twrds gns nd gn wnrs, t's nt bd thng t cll ppl t n t.

...bcs f th gn hd nt bn prsnt, th hrstylst wld hv smply smld n blss, fr f th mrdrs r f th hndgn.

(rlls ys)

Nt. hrdrssr wld hv jst stbbd hr wth ny f th thr hlf-dzn lthl mplmnts n frnt f hr (scssrs, rzr, tc).

nd bcs ll mls 17-45 nt lrdy n th rmy r n th wll-rgltd mlt ccrdng t SC 10-311, th hrdrssr ds nt mt ths rqrmnts (sh s wmn), nd s nt lglly bl t hv gn.

(rlls ys gn)

Gn cntrl s fndmntlly ntlrnt, sxst, rcst, gst, nd clssst. Syng "bt ppl r gttng SHT!" dsn't mk t ny lss s, nd jst mks y lk slly. Lbrls lk m knw tht gn cntrl s lsng prpstn n ths cntry, nd s n bstcl t tlrnt, lbrl, nd dmcrtc scty.

Lks lk Wlthr P99 Cmpct. Gd gn, bt prfr Glck 19 n 9mm.

f crs, ths flmng lbrl Dmcrt prfrs NT t dvrts th fct tht h's crryng gn (t cn ffnd th dlct snsblts f ths rnd m).

Ths w gt cgntv dssnnc:

"Gns r bd! Mrly wnng n cn mk y mr prn t kllng yr lvd n whn thr's n rgmnt! nd kllng smn vr prkng spc! nd...nd...nd..."

"...bt vlnt vdgms n whch th ctl *ct* f kllng s prtryd grphclly wth spryng bld nd dsmmbrmnt d nt mk th plyr mr prn t vlnc."

Sgh. Smtms 'm shmd t b lbrl.

s lbrl, knw tht Fr smtms gts t rght (lk hr), bt smtms gts t wy wrng (s hs pst nt-gn wrk).

Byrne should be on a VPN.

That said, I sometimes find that my net access is filtered if I'm trying to get to a gun manufacturer or discussion website.

"sslt rfls, jst t lv yr lf? "

n sslt rfl s flly tmtc frrm n n ntrmdt crtrdg. sslt rfls hv bn tghtly rgltd nd rgstrd snc 1934 (bt th cncpt ws nvntd n 1943), nd n lgl cvln-wnd n hs vr bn sd n ny crm snc thy strtd trckng thm.

"sslt wpns", whch (ths wk) mns sm-t cpy f mltry frrm wth hgh mgzn cpcty nd pstl grp, r sd n pprxmtly 0.18% f ll frrm crm ccrdng t stdy by Klck. Thy r vrtlly nn-prblm, nd ny ttmpt t rgltng thm stms frm mrl pnc nd dsr fr cntrl rthr thn ny dsr t ctlly rdc crm r vlnc.

"sslt wpns" n my stt hv vbrnt sprtng cmmnty srrndng thm, nd hv bn sd n svrl hm dfnss n Flrd nd Txs.

"y'v gt nthr lng hrd thnk cmng."

Vry wll. 'll jst gnr ths tw.

"ls, gnrl nnncmnt: 'm cllng mrtrm n rfrncs t ncntnnc n gn dscssns."

Cn y xtnd yr mrtrm t rfrncs t pns lngth s wll? :)

"mgn systm whr lcnc t pssss gn nstntly cnfrrd rspct snc t mnt tht prsn hd pssd mny rgrs tsts nd trls nd ws prsn tht cld b lkd p t nd rspctd?"

Gnrlly, tht's th wy t s nw. Shwng yr CCW prmt t cp wll gnrlly gt y t f mst spdng tckts nd thr mvng vltns (fl t sgnl, rnnng stp sgns, n lft trn, t l.).

Y dn't sk fr th crtsy slck f crs, bt dn't b srprsd f y gt t.

"Th thr wy t rstrct C&C hr s f y pt p sgn syng "Cffhs X bns gns n ths prmss." nd f crs th sgn hs t b n ch nd vry ntrnc, dsplyd t y lvl nd n lrg lgbl typ. t's nts."

nd f crs tht sgn css ll gns t mgclly dsppr n pff f lvndr scntd smk whn thy ntr th dr.

Sms lk th nly ppl crryng gns n tht cffhs wld b ns tht dn't fllw th lw nywy, nd r CC'ng llglly - g. flns nd crmnls.

"Lw nfrcmnt ddn't lk tht t ll."

Nt prly crrct. Lw nfrcmnt hs bn plld n ths. Th rnk nd fl ws vrwhlmngly n fvr f CCW, bt th pltcl ppnts (chfs f plc) wr gnst lwfl ctzns crryng gns, lkly rflctng thr pltcl mstrs' vws.

Hr s thrd n ffcr.cm:
http://frms.ffcr.cm/frms/rchv/ndx.php/t-6229.html

Hr s nthr rfrnc:
http://www.nqrr.cm/dtns/2001/02/25/lc_th_cncld-crry.html

"Fr sm strng rsn lt f pstrs dn't lk th d f thr cngrgtn pckn' ht."

chrch smwhr n C dcdd t rm thmslvs, nd stppd gy ntnt n mss mrdr. chrch sn't sm spcl xcptn f mgcl plc whr gns dn't wrk.

http://rmsndthlw.cm/rchvs/2007/12/shtng_t_nw_1.php

" prsn wh cld b rld pn t b trstd wth gn snc thy wld nvr, vr mss t r b sbjct t ptty dsrdrs f md lk tmpr?"

xctly, tht's wht w hv nw. n Mchgn nd Txs, thy hv fnd tht CCW hldrs r svrl tms lss lkly thn vrg ctzns t b rrstd fr ny crm whtsvr.

" d nt prmt ppl t ffctvly cnsr fr dscssn by bhvng s rpllntly tht thy drv wy nd slnc cntrry vws."

Wht, lk hvng n's sl rgmnt cnsst f cpy-pstng nws strs bt ppl bng klld by gns whn y hv nthng ls lft?

'Cs tht wld b y.

:)

"W hv t g bck t tm whn th chnc sghtng f "lng, tblr bjct" sn't tmtclly ssctd wth "gn"."

r whr sghtng f vn n ctl gn ds nt ndc nrsnng pnc.

""Slf cntrl" lds t d-fct gn cntrl."

xctly. f ppl dn't hv n nrsnng fr f gns sch tht thy cnjr thm p t f thn r, thn tht prdcs lss fr nd lss ppl wll wnt t crry gn s rslt. Hwvr, thr wll lwys b ths f s tht wld vn crry gn n prfctly sf scty.

"#43 ntns
Dn't fd th trll.

Scndd, thrws ths wll nd p bng nthr 300 cmmnt pst.

Dn't fd t."

Sys th sm gys tht gt schld fr thr ntlrnc n sd pst. Clssc. :)

Wll, thr ws n ncdnt hr whr prfssr tk blck-pwdr rfl t clss crryng t pnly (fr clss), smbdy wt thr pnts nd clld th cps, nd n cp shws p, sys "h, jst n ld mzzl ldr crrd by brdd ld gy - n thrt" nd gs bck bt hs bsnss lk nthng hppnd.

N lckdwn, n PB, n SWT, n nthng. Gy pnly crrs gn nt cmps nd th rctn s vry mnr. 'm gld lv n sn plc nstd f sm plc wth sch prlyzng fr f gns tht smn *mgnng* thy sw gn s cs t lck dwn cmps, wst dzns f cps' tm, nd spnd tns f thsnds f txpyr dllrs.

nd tght nthr fllw lbrl t sht tdy. Hppnss!

n prsn, f crs. :)

Wht's sck-pppt?

Frthr, wll sbmt tht ths rtcl n ddtn t th THF Bstn ncdnt s wht hppns whn y lt yr scty bcm rld by fr - fr f gns nd trrrsm, rspctvly. t's prtty sd.

Hr. gr wth th rtcl "t wht pnt ds rctnry pnc srpss cmmn sns?" t sms lk sm cltrs r s nfctd wth nmstc, prmtv, crg-clt fr f gns tht thy bgn t crt bgymn t f thn r. Myb f thr cltr hd mr *ctl* xprnc nd knwldg f gns, thy wldn't wt thmslvs vr cmr trpd.

*snrk*

Wht mks y thnk thr's nly n jlbrn rthr thn cltn f thm? :)

Dn't strn yr lbws pttng yrslvs n th bck t hrd. BB ndd sht f smthng t cmbt th snctmny.

"Hwvr th nds f th pr nd dsnfrnchsd dn't jst g wy s t mks sns t rm nslf n tht sttn. t s nt sgn f bttr thngs t cm tht s fr sr. Qt th ppst."

Rght.

Jhnny Rch wll lwys b bl t py n-nck strngmn thg nmd Tts $2500 mnth t stnd by hs dr f plc prtctn cntns t g dwn th tbs (sd thg dsn't nd gn nywy, bcs h's bg, strng, nd ntmdtng).

Hwvr, th lw-bdng pr lk 65 yr ld Fl Smstrss wth th bd hp hv n sch ptn, nd s sch $250 n-tm nvstmnt n (lglly bght, f crs) S&W .38 rvlvr r pmp shtgn s mch mr ffrdbl fr hr, nd llws hr t xrt th sm mnt f frc s Tts fr mch lss cst. mnmlly mntnd frrm wll lst dcds.

Gvn tht w'v stblshd tht th plc hv n dty t prtct y ndvdlly, gvn tht th pr nd dsnfrnchsd lv n cmmnts tht cn't ffrd gd plc, nd gvn tht t's prbbly gng t gt wrs - d y s why sm lbrls lk th d f prtctng gn wnrshp, bcs t llws th pr nd dsnfrnchsd t prvd prtctn fr thmslvs nd thr fmls?

"rmng nslf n th fc f plc frc tht rfss t d t's jb my sm lk rtnl rspns, spps t s, bt t s ls n stp wy frm th rl f wr lrds nd strngmn."

Dd y knw tht n twn n th S hd pd plc frc f ny knd bfr 1838? Hrdly "rl by strngmn".

"ll cn tll y s tht mtnl ttchmnts t lvng hmn bngs s fr bttr thn ny lv y my fl fr gn. gss t's jst qstn f wht y chs t vl."

http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Fls_dlmm

W tnd t wnt t prtct ths w vl. wmn wh wldn't thrws tch gn wll s n wllngly f hr chld s thrtnd.

" thnk y hv blt prsn fr yrslf wth brs f fr. t ny tm y wsh, y cn wlk t f tht cll nd stnd n th snlght wth ppl wh chs nt t lv n fr. W'll b wtng. N n cn frc y."

http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Fls_dlmm
http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Nrvn_fllcy
http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Prfct_sltn_fllcy
http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/ppl_t_mtn

Nt t mntn th ttr cndscnsn nd mndcs mpthy tht zs frm mst f yr psts.

Rate of gun defenses according to the US Department of Justice, 2004 study, at 1.5 million a year: 2.85 defenses per minute

Rate of murder with a firearm: 1 per hour

"drnk drvng ws sclly ccptbl nc"

Ddgng gn.

Cpy-pst. Cpy-pst. Cpy-pst. Cpy-pst. Cpy-pst.

Wh's th trll hr? ll

s tht ll y hv lft nw? Cpy-pstng? N rgmnts t ll?

http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/ppl_t_fr

"hv y trd tllng tht t thr fmls?"

slly, rtnl hmns dn't blm crs whn ppl d n t ccdnts, r knvs whn ppl gt stbbd. Yt w fl cmfrtbl blmng gns whn ppl gt sht. Hw nmstc nd prmtv.

"fv mr dd n Ls ngls, s."

http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Fllcy_f_th_sngl_cs
http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Dnyng_th_ntcdnt

"f y'r n pstn whr y nd gn t kp y sf frm th gvrnmnt, y hv lrdy lst. Thy wll lwys hv mr nd bggr gns, s wll s hlcptrs, jts, - whtvr thy nd."

rq. Vtnm. ps.

"My pnt s tht f y hv gn n yr hs, y r ncrdbly mr lkly t gt md r drnk nd kll smn n yr fmly, (r hv smn n yr fmly kll y n smlr fshn) thn y r gng t prtct yr fmly frm sm ntrdr."

Y qt th rptdly nd thrghly dscrdtd Kllrmn stdy. Fl. Th 43-tms nmbr s cmplt fbrctn sd t jstfy $2M CDC grnt, nd ws th nsprtn fr *LW* tht sd th CDC cld nvr fnd nthr stdy nvlvng gns, vr.

http://hm.cmcst.nt/~dsmjd/tx/dsmjd/rkb/kllrmn.htm

" ls wrry bt my kds gng t n f thr frnd's hs nd fndng gn."

nd tht's why th NR hs th "dd th gl" prgrm. r y wr f ths?

"G t th vd str nd lk t th rck f drms. hg prcntg hv smn hldng gn. t's s prvlnt, y dn't vn ntc t ntl y rlly thnk bt t. t's lk ttm r smthng tht ppl crry rnd t shw tht thy mn bsnss - t lst n th mvs."

ndd. vn thgh lk shtng gns nd hv trnd n th mndst t s thm dfnsvly, dslk ctn mvs, nd cn't vn wtch hrrr flms t ll.

" gss wht 'm syng s, mllw t."

N. Th lst tm gn wnrs "mllwd t", w gt th sslt Wpns Bn. Nvr gn.

"Th mr rvw ths thrd, th mr pprnt t bcms tht fr s th mtvtng fctr n gn rlnc.

Hvng gn ds nt bnsh fr,t rnfrcs t."

http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Prf_by_ssrtn
http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/ppl_t_rdcl

"Hvng gn ds nt bnsh fr,t rnfrcs t."

n thr wrds, clld y t n bggng th qstn nd y ddgd gn.

wnng gn dsn't rnfrc fr ny mr thn wnng frst d kt rnfrcs fr. Myb t rnfrcs fr n Y, bt cn't b hld rspnsbl fr tht f crs. Y'r prjctng gn.

n hps t nvr s thr th gn r th frst d kt. Bt sm ppl wll prjct thr wn frs nd nrss nt gns n rdr t try nd tk thm wy. Tht's nccptbl.

Th mr ** rd ths thrd, t sms tht mr lbrls wn, sht nd crry gns thn y rlz. Ths s gd thng.

" dn't thnk ny f s g bt r dly lvs n prptl fr f mr bd thngs hppnng."

nd nthr d , f crs. Y'r ssgnng yr frs t m nd ppl lk m - "wll, th nly rsn ** wld crry gn s f flt dthly frd f smthng bd hppnng. Ths ppl mst b flng th sm wy wld." t's ntllctlly cnctd, cndscndng, nd wrng.

"N ddly sslts hppnd t m n tht tm."

...tht s, bcs 'm stll lv.

"cn crrctly ssm tht nthng f cnsqnc hppnd t y n prtclr n tht tm?"

N ddly sslts hppnd t m n tht tm.

http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Bggng_th_qstn

"Have you tried living without a gun?"

I did. For the first 20-some years of my life. And then I decided I didn't like living like that after what happened to my family and friends.

"How many times have you had to face down an armed home invasion?"

None, thankfully. But again, it only needs to happen once.

"Have you tried living without a gun?"

I've already answered that. I do, all the time.

"Do they shoot the same number of bullets?"

Doesn't matter. Though I would submit that I have never heard of a CCW holder running through 3 full magazines (40+ shots) like I've heard of cops doing. Most CCW incidents are over in three shots. Innocents have a lot less likelihood of getting shot if it's a CCW holder doing the shooting, and that's what matters.

"One can't always trust the police to be rational, but it's worse to turn over a dangerous situation to some random citizen who thinks they can handle it because they have a gun on hand."

Well, Gary Kleck's study concluded that pistol permit holders hit an innocent bystander 2% of the time, while police hit one 11% of the time. So I'd trust J. Random Permitholder over the police for sure.

"I wouldn't trust anyone I knew had a concealed weapon to act in my best interest just because they had a gun. I know exactly how I would respond, though; I would be fearful."

That must suck to live that way. Something like 2-5% of a given state has people carrying concealed guns every day, and the Texas state permit system found that they were many times more law-abiding than the average citizen:

http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba324/ba324.html

"# Licensees were 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public - 127 per 100,000 population versus 730 per 100,000.

# Licensees were 14 times less likely to be arrested for nonviolent offenses than the general public - 386 per 100,000 population versus 5,212 per 100,000."

Some states even have public data. Here's MI. http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/CCWAnnualReport_181416_7.pdf

65 revoked permits revoked / 36754 permits issued = revocation rate of 0.0017.

"Ever caught a glimspe of some dude's gun but you saw no badge? Did you feel safe or extremely on guard"

Every day. I see a lot of people out and about in the major city I live near with cell phones on their belt, wallet in the back pocket, and a REALLY heavy fanny pack. Because I know that law-abiding people with CCW permits vastly outnumber criminals, I know that the guy I'm looking at with a gun is vastly more likely to be a good guy than a criminal. And then I think no more of it and go about my business. BTW, we hide guns extremely well for the most part. You're never going to see them. Open carry is legal in much of the US, but I personally don't - too likely to scare people like you and waste some cop's time.

@Teresa

"I've never seen fundie ministries of any kind that write like Takuan. "

Oh, that's easy.

"Dr. Joseph Nicolosi
“I do not believe that any man can ever be truly at peace in living out a homosexual orientation.”"

Change to
"I do not believe that any man can ever be truly at peace carrying or owning a gun."

Jane Boyer, Board Member of Exodus Ex-Gay Ministries: "in areas that are most accepting of homosexuality, such as Hollywood and San Francisco and New York, there is the highest percentage of suicide, death from chemical dependency, drug addiction, alcoholism, and HIV amongst the gay community, and I am concerned about that, because I love the homosexual. Obviously, in those areas that they are receiving the greatest acceptance, there is the highest percentage of death and despair amongst the gay community." - Oct 16, 96 - Family Research Council Web site

"in areas that are most accepting of guns, such as Hollywood and San Francisco and New York, there is the highest percentage of suicide... Obviously, in those areas that they are receiving the greatest acceptance, there is the highest percentage of death and despair..."

The rhetoric is the same, and it's just as intolerant. It's a conflation of one's own agenda, moral panic, and ignorance.

(Now, you say on cue: "But no one in a fundie ministry wrote Takuan's exact words, so it's completely different!" Intolerance and bigotry, however, are the same everywhere.)

@takuan
"The police don't have to protect you? I find that hard to accept. Any policemen wish to comment?"

@dodds
"I'm interested in that too JLBraun - the bit about the police not having to protect you - can you elaborate?"

Really?

I'm surprised this isn't common knowledge by now.

Castle Rock v. Gonzales
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-278.ZS.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html
"The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation."

Translation: Police only uphold the law and solve crimes. They have no legal obligation to protect anyone - you're on your own.

Which, if you think about it, is the correct POV for the Supreme Court to take. Otherwise, you would be able to sue the government if they ever failed to protect you from anything or anyone.

So. Yes. Really, the police have no duty to protect you or anyone else. The police carry guns not for *your* protection, but for *theirs*.

So getting your own is a rational response. :)

Shooting for taking someone's property is, of course, wrong. Shooting someone for stalking is, of course, wrong.

If someone breaks in, they can have my laptop. I will however hold the front sights on them as they leave in case they want my life instead of the TV. If a gun or a knife or deadly force is ever used to threaten me in the course of a robbery or a break in or stalking, they have indicated that they do not respect their own life enough to know what it is worth. I will respect their views by shooting them to the ground.

"in more than few of them, having a gun with me would have made them infinitely worse."

So, are there *any* situations ever where the victim having a gun would make things *better* instead of worse?

"Much of the daily goodness we enjoy comes from leaving that behind. If you are that intimidated, there are other measures lesser than lethal force."

Care to tell that to the stalker who left messages saying "I'll cut you" on a friend's voicemail? Or broke all the windows on her car? "We, as a society, left all that behind." Yeah, that will work. Please.

"You seem to live somewhere where the civil authority does not function."

No, I live in the United States, where it is codified in law that cops don't have the obligation to protect me at all. We all are "the civil authority". And my town has a very low crime rate thanks to that.

"If you are capable of putting away your gun for a few days, why don't you? I am interested in reasons of course - not just "I choose not to"."

Because my sister was robbed and could have been raped. Because my friend was stalked by a psycho. Because I had gay friends that received death threats. Because two friends in high school were raped. Because a guy in my dorm raped somebody. Because I had a friend who worked in a rape crisis center. Because in all of these cases, the police cannot and will not ever ever ever be there in time to stop anything, they can only take statements from witnesses, and maybe the victim if they're still alive. Because if I need a gun, I will need it RIGHT NOW. Because the police (by law) are prevented from having an individual duty to protect any one person.

Because in the end, bad things happen to good people, and those good people never thought it would happen to them.

"Are you sure that the class you imagine exists?"

Yes.

"we'd all be more careful about assuming we know each other's sexual orientations."

I said nothing about anyone's orientation at all. I am saying that takuan's rhetoric is virtually identical to that used by bigoted fundamentalist ex-gay ministries, and that such language is intolerant and wrong.

"I am asking a simple question about a totally voluntary choice. It is already clear you are capable of choosing to hold a gun. My question is; are you able to put it down? Are you capable of that choice? Who is the master here? You? Or the gun?"

Ugh. Still with this. Would you at least attempt to separate yourself from the language of ignorant anti-gay religious fundies?

To answer your question, of course I can. Doing so is about as significant as voluntarily going without another tool like a cell phone or flashlight for a day and has zero moral or social import.

I also choose to put it in the safe when I visit countries that happen to be either juntas, thugocracies or dictatorships for business or vacation. I could choose not to go because they do not recognize a right to arms, but I do not. I actually feel rather safe in the several dictatorships that I visit, because the penalties for even simple burglary are severe and the police often inadvertently kill suspects under "interrogation". Criminals tend to not flourish in those societies, but I would not want to live there. But because our society respects the individual, I choose to carry a gun when I am here, because I am a part of *this* society and not living under some junta.

Sorry:

The message is passive-aggressive doubletalk:
"I care about you, so I'm going to help you with this terrible affliction you're suffering from." It's intolerant, bigoted, shameful, and not Liberal.

"I'm sorry? Are you some how under the impression that my sexual orientation is homosexual? I find that strange indeed. How did you arrive at this conclusion?"

Now you're just dodging. You know perfectly well what I'm getting at. I am in no way implying anything about you.

I'll put it more explicitly.

You saying "It would be a good thing if you just put the gun away for a few days" is the exact same intolerant, condescending, and bigoted rhetoric used by Christian "ex-gay" ministries such as Exodus International and others: "It would be a good thing if you tried just not to be gay for a few days."

The message is passive-agressive doubletalk:
"I care about you, so I'm going to help you with this terrible and affliction you're suffering from." It's intolerant, bigoted, shameful, and not Liberal.

Still intolerant. Still bigoted. Still not Liberal.

"Let us try anew: dispensing with all mutually agreed irrelevancies: Proposed: You,the person with the extraneous (to wit: your homosexuality) are invited by me,the person with nothing but the natural, to try living a few days without the extraneous.

No value judgments are presumed, no perjoratives are intended. Nothing to do with anything else but your homosexuality. Gay. Not gay.

I contend the absence of your homosexuality will not be negative."

"Now, why would you associate the loss of your gun with homosexuality?"

Huh? Someone's projecting here, and it isn't me. The point is that wayyyy back there at #154, someone said,

"If it had been a video of a gay couple getting married, those same people would have been all in support of it.

"Social liberal" is supposed to mean you're accepting of all sorts of lifestyles and you don't judge people just because they don't live like you do. Instead it seems to be coming to mean "we accept people who live our particular alternative lifestyle and we reject all others". So kinda like conservative Southern Baptists, but with the narrow mindset situated in a different place.""

I was merely extending that analogy. Some "social liberals" are merely fundamentalists with a different set of values, instead of being truly accepting of all cultures and peoples. True liberals are accepting of everybody.

"Do you really feel I am bigoted and intolerant because I live comfortably without a gun and encourage you to try the same?"

Yes. Because it reads like this:

"Do you really feel I am bigoted and intolerant because I live comfortably without being a homosexual and encourage you to do the same?"

Think about your words and how they come across, please. Lots and lots of liberals like me enjoy shooting and happen to carry guns with us, and we don't much like it when you treat us like the fundies treat gay people - that is, as lepers who have something "wrong" with them and can be changed by enough laws and social conditioning. It's ignorant, intolerant, and wrong.

"The world is bigger than north Texas or even the entire USA."

I know. Visiting 34 countries, living in 3, working in 4, and speaking 3 languages will do that to a person. I still like the USA the best.

"Just try a simple first step: live a few days without your gun. Tell us how that works out.
No need to be afraid. You can do it. I believe there is more to you than your gun."

Look, just because someone lives their life in a manner you consider unacceptable or wrong, that doesn't mean there is actually something wrong with them! Isn't it intolerant and bigoted to try and correct them and the "lifestyle" you consider aberrant and wrong?

What if you had said this instead?

"Really, there is no need to be homosexual. I suppose you may have been victimized badly in the past - that does affect people. Just try a simple first step: live a few days without having sex with men or fantasizing about it, and try to call on the Holy Spirit to realign you with God's plan. Tell us how that works out. No need to be a homosexual. You can do it."

Why can't you be tolerant and accepting of those that choose a different lifestyle than you, instead of castigating them for a lifestyle that you consider wrong and abhorrent?

Namaste.

@anti-whatever

"You've made thirty lengthy comments on this thread. You've only ever made one other comment on BB, and it's a pro-gun comment. I call troll."

So? At least some people were educated, instead of having to listen to only one side of the debate. I would note that the tone of the discussion became notably more educational and civil after I and a few other pro-gun people became involved.

#234

"I guess some people just aren't as strong as me. Pay attention and I'll teach you how to live without fear to the point of not needing a gun."

How conceited and close-minded. Why are you being so intolerant of others?

#238

Takuan, methinks that you need to rethink your position too. Namaste.

And I'll repeat the question, because no one seems to have an answer:

"Looking at the historical record, can you name a time and place that restricting law abiding citizen's access to hand held weapons (since guns have only been around a few hundred years) has made them safer?"

After reading this entire thread, I'm glad of one thing:

That we were able to get 300 million guns into the hands of citizens, including 45 million semiautomatic civilian defense rifles like the AR-15 and AK-47.

You're never getting them all. A ban of any kind is, in all practical senses, moot.

Secondly, Democrats and Republicans are finally getting that gun control causes them to be voted out of office.

Our guns are safe for the time being.

"So you think that a guy who is robbing you with a knife in your back is going to be soooo stupid that he's going to let you pull a gun on him?"

I don't even have to think hypothetically. It happens all the time. Even completely untrained and unarmed people manage to overcome armed criminals, and it happens virtually every day. Action beats reaction, every single time. A gun makes it even easier!

http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html

Victims Fight Back in Home Invasion

One robbery suspect is on the loose and another is in the hospital after four victims fought back.

Police say the four victims were barbecuing when two men with guns entered the home. One of the victims said he made a near-fatal mistake by leaving the garage door partially open. The victims, who do not want to be identified for safety reasons, say they ended up fighting for their lives and thought they might die.

"The look in their eyes, especially when they started beating us in the back of the heads with the guns. It was kind of like someone would torture a little animal and then joking about how they were going to love killing us," said one victim.

The men were pinned to the floor with shotguns. "It got ugly when they went back downstairs and decided to tell the women to ***undress their clothes****," the victim added, "The girls were really crying and you could just tell that they were incredibly upset."

The victim told Eyewitness News that one of the suspects who was preparing to sexually assault the women turned his attention away from the guns and let down his guard.

The two male victims saw their opportunity.

"I grabbed him, threw him down on the ground, grabbed a weight from the weight set and smashed him in the head."

The women also joined in the fight, hitting the suspects with a frying pan.

"One of the girls completely nude managed to grab a gun and shoot the guy in the chest area and in the leg."

"She did what she had to do and I have to be thankful that she was able to do what she did and if she didn't I might not be able to give you this story right now."

The suspect who was shot has serious injuries and is in the hospital. The second suspect is on the run and as for the victims, they have minor injuries.

And secondly, are you seriously saying that we should place our trust in the *criminal* who is threatening us with *deadly force* - that hopefully he's having a good day and decides not to kill us?

Fuck that. What stupidity.

"Do you really think that an attacker is going to let you pull out your gun?"

Ever hear of an OODA loop? Look it up.

People drawing a gun (or doing a successful takeaway) on a drawn gun and hitting the criminal happens all the time. Action beats reaction almost every time. Criminals expect meek compliance. Fast and violent action beats reaction.

"But but but you'll just make him mad!" you say.

Goes the old joke:

A Mongol warrior walks into a market. Screaming, he demands all the shopkeepers line up. He begins to behead them one by one. A voice from the end of the line yells, "He is but one man! We are many, and we can take him!" Someone else hisses, "Fool! Do you want to make him *mad*?"

It's clear to me that you haven't thought about this, done any research, or had any training. Run along now.

@172

"Uhm, no….for the Tit for Tat strategy to work as you suggest, each player would require a perfect knowledge of who has been nice or nasty. This is clearly not the case with criminals in a real society."

I fail to see how this applies. Two good citizens interacting is a series of cooperation. A criminal interacting with a good citizen:

"Hey, man, got a light?" (cooperation)
"Sure, here" (cooperation)
*pulls knife* "Gimme your *$%&$ wallet or I'll kill you!" (defection)
*BLAMBLAM* (defection)
"Hello, 911? A man attacked me with a knife and I defended myself. He's still alive, and I don't want him to die." (cooperation)

A disarmed citizen has only the following course of action, as they have no option to defect from the social contract:

"Hey, man, got a light?" (cooperation)
"Sure, here" (cooperation)
*pulls knife* "Gimme your *$%&$ wallet or I'll kill you!" (defection)
"Here. Please don't kill me." (cooperation)
"I don't want witnesses." *stabbity stab* (defection)
*dies*

@169:
"I can report a high level of interest in the "hobby" being discussed, across a wide spectrum of kids where I teach. Lots of kids enjoy revenge fantasies for being outsiders, and many students are enthralled by gangster culture as well."

Did you know that target shooting used to be part of gym class? Did you know that target shooting engaged in as an activity reduces blood pressure, increases attention span, and reduces hyperactivity in children? Guns aren't always teh evul. West Virginia wants to teach gun handling and safety in schools again, which I'm in favor of.

"Guns have taken one major toll today, my productivity."

Indeed. Me too. Out.

"So fear and suspicion of the other carry the day. Sad."

*facepalm*

Since you failed to google for "Prisoner's Dilemma", I'll do it for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma

"In game theory, the prisoner's dilemma (sometimes abbreviated PD) is a type of non-zero-sum game in which two players may each "cooperate" with or "defect" (i.e., betray) the other player. In this game, as in all game theory, the only concern of each individual player ("prisoner") is maximizing his/her own payoff, without any concern for the other player's payoff. The unique equilibrium for this game is a Pareto-suboptimal solution—that is, rational choice leads the two players to both play defect even though each player's individual reward would be greater if they both played cooperate."

"By analysing the top-scoring strategies, Axelrod stated several conditions necessary for a strategy to be successful.

Nice
The most important condition is that the strategy must be "nice", that is, it will not defect before its opponent does. Almost all of the top-scoring strategies were nice; therefore a purely selfish strategy will not "cheat" on its opponent, for purely utilitarian reasons first.
Retaliating
However, Axelrod contended, the successful strategy must not be a blind optimist. It must sometimes retaliate. An example of a non-retaliating strategy is Always Cooperate. This is a very bad choice, as "nasty" strategies will ruthlessly exploit such softies.
Forgiving
Another quality of successful strategies is that they must be forgiving. Though they will retaliate, they will once again fall back to cooperating if the opponent does not continue to play defects. This stops long runs of revenge and counter-revenge, maximizing points.
Non-envious
The last quality is being non-envious, that is not striving to score more than the opponent (impossible for a ‘nice’ strategy, i.e., a 'nice' strategy can never score more than the opponent). "

This means that given a society of armed men, the nicest, most forgiving, non-envious will tend to win. Criminals, while they get short-term gain by repeatedly defecting from the social contract, are eventually eliminated via retaliation. If gun control removes the ability to retaliate from some members, repeated defectors win. If you attempt to force the "always cooperate" on everyone, that works until *just one person* gains the ability to use force and defect, and she wins everything.

There you go. It's not "fear and suspicion", it's a Nash equilibrium. :)

"I suspect that just off screen, he has successfully bagged a giant barrel of high fructose corn syrup which, when properly dried and cured, should provide this rugged frontiersman adequate provisions for the brutal winter to come."

OK, that's friggin' hilarious. I don't care which side you're on.

"but his father's unlocked and loaded gun made it easy"

Or the main gas line going to the stove. Or the gallon of gas for the lawnmower...

There are a dozen things in that house besides the gun that would have enabled the 15yo psycho to kill his entire family easily. The gun was but one of them.

"A right to security of person exists - that can be accomplished by other means than a gun in every pocket."

Goes the old saw:

"When you need help right now, the police are only minutes away."

Did you know that the police have no individual duty to protect any one person? Google "Warren v. District of Columbia".

"'Once you have guns in society, there is no return' seems to be your argument, a tautology if ever there was one."

OK, so we both agree this is true. You can't un-invent guns.

"But, over time, people have stopped carrying spears, knives, clubs and crossbows."

Uh, we gave up carrying those because guns are more effective. Each one of those requires strength to use, which women and the elderly lack.

"As a race, we've come to recognise that there are better ways of doing things than "mine is more deadly than yours"."

Indeed. Google "Prisoner's Dilemma". It shows that entities possessed of the ability to eliminate the other (or using force to get what they want) are better off cooperating. You don't have to remove the ability to use force to get harmony.

Here is another take on it:

"Why the gun is civilization"
http://munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-gun-is-civilization.html

"Well, at least on an individual level. The same could be true of guns. But it takes trust."

It could be true for guns, but I'll continue to carry mine until we find that out. And it does take trust. Which is why the state I live in *trusts* me with a concealed handgun.

"then you accept the responsibility of what happens next."

Exactly. I accept the responsibility, karmically and spiritually. If someone dies as a result of my defense, then I will feel bad and we will both share the responsibility for his death. If he does not die, I will summon aid for him. I doubt he would do the same for me.

I'm glad that you can use teh Wikipedias too. I'm glad your arguments have become more cogent after reading the "logical fallacies" section.

Consider the following - gun control really is quite racist, so it's not so much an appeal to ridicule as a statement of the content of past laws, read here:

http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html
"Virginia's response to Turner's Rebellion prohibited free blacks "to keep or carry any firelock of any kind, any military weapon, or any powder or lead..."

And the reason that I included the Buddhist quotes was not to support my position prima facie, but to answer the specific statements intimating that armed self defense is antithetical to Buddhism. So it's not strictly an appeal to authority, but a statement of fact: Buddhist thought does allow for armed self defense with lethal force.

So, with that out of the way, where is the harm in me, a loving law-abiding Buddhist, owning a gun for defensive purposes? What do you have to fear from me?

And the 15yo could just have easily (if not more easily) killed his family by dousing the entire place with gasoline and burning the house down. Eliminating guns wouldn't necessarily save their lives at all.

"Oh, and I'll have it on a hair trigger in case you shoot first... I think you probably see where I'm going with this. "

I do. The well-known and debunked "Internet Weapons Escalation argument". First, as you are (probably) a law-abiding citizen, I have no problem with you carrying a gun. I have nothing to fear from someone law-abiding like you.

And even if you are a criminal, I still have more to gain from being armed, even if you escalate your armament to match mine. In an interview with actual criminals in the Florida prison system, the #1 fear of criminals when committing a crime is encountering an armed citizen. As a criminal, you have a vested interest in not dying. Even if you have a much deadlier weapon than me, my weapon is more than capable of killing you, even if you have an automatic weapon and all I have is a .32ACP mousegun. You, as your fellow criminals have said, are scared of the tiniest chance that I might be armed with a deadly weapon.

Lastly, the "escalation" argument is already moot, as you the criminal will disregard gun laws anyway to get whatever weapon you want - and if you do that, then law-abiding citizens like myself will do the "escalating", by breaking the law and acquiring defensive firearms!

The "escalation" argument fails at virtually all levels. Try again.

"@83, JLBraun: ergo, you would have thought, they would have less need of a gun and it should be women who use them. Unless, of course, there is some other factor (insecurity in one's masculinity, say) at play in the mind of the gun lover?"

I love when this happens.

Remember when I said "Gun control is sexist"? You just proved why. Men are stronger and faster - thus, removing womens' ability to own guns is abhorrently sexist. Disarm everyone, and men rule. Recognize even womens' and blacks' right to own guns, and an egalitarian society is easier to achieve.

And if any gun owner cared about the gun as penis proxy, they wouldn't carry one with a 3.5" barrel .355" in diameter. And are you saying that women gun owners just wish they had a penis? I don't get anti-gun rhetoric sometimes.

"few people in the world who have more powerfully demonstrated the message of harmlessness than they."

When you are facing down the entire Chinese military, have had your guns stripped from you by force, and are living under a repressive police state, you have no *option* but to be harmless.

The "harmlessness" of the Tibetans can hardly be called moral or noble. It's more survival than anything.

"if you intend to use "fallacy of argument" answers, please review your own first"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

"If children are dying from the other causes you mention, you can rest assured people are trying their best to do something about it."

Even though I don't belong to the NRA, they indeed are trying to do something about it:

"What is The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program?"
http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/

"An interesting sub-point (is that a phrase?): according to some random essay I just read, over 91% of the gun murders in the US are carried out by men."

Sub-point indeed, and a bit of a tautology. Men are more likely to commit most types of crime - they're stronger and faster. Because criminals in most cases need to apply force to get what they want, of course men are going to be more able to apply that force.

That really doesn't contribute to the discussion anyway.

"only" 75 children died from accidental gunshot in 2005. "Only".

Exactly. And because this ranks so low on the cause of death rankings, the justification for banning guns on this basis falls apart - because if your object is to prevent accidental deaths of children, you'd be better off starting by banning poisons, ladders, plastic buckets, swimming pools, automobiles, and climbable trees.

"The fact that the Dalai Lama supports killing people (under the right circumstances, of course! Of course!) does not indicate to me that killing is permissible. It indicates that, somewhere along the road, Buddhism lost its way."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

"Guns are not computers or cars and to lump them into the same category is to create something entirely imaginary for the sake of argument. To what purpose were they made? To drive? To calculate numbers?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

"I cannot see the essential nonviolent functionality of guns. They exist to cause harm. That, not recreation, is their function."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

"I think you can feel the power a gun gives over life and death, and that is what you are attracted to, not aesthetic beauty or sport."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

"Well, since you are God, after all, I suppose this argument is over now."

It is, but not for the reasons you think.

;)

"You know Beergood, I've decided that, for my own safety, I need to keep anthrax in my house. I'm sure you, as my neighbour, will feel safer just knowing that."

Fail. Arms are protected by the 2nd. Anthrax is an ordnance and can be regulated.

@songe

"Your statistics are not relevant unless you at the very least also factor in the per capita percentage of gun ownership."

My point is that one shouldn't be looking at "gun violence" as independent from any other type of violence. Killed with a cricket bat is just as dead as killed with a gun, so looking at gun violence independently isn't correct.

Secondly, in most of the countries on this list:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

...guns in civilian hands are ILLEGAL. Do you think that criminals will respond to a nice telephone survey?

And to put a final coda on this specious line of reasoning, the UN Small Arms Survey (http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/index.html) estimates that 50% of the world's firearms (including all armies) are in the hands of US citizens. According to nationmaster.com (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms), the US accounts for less than 9.3% of the world's firearm murders.

Lastly, according to the CDC there were only 789 accidental firearm deaths in 2005, or 0.7% of all unintentional deaths (http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html).

Also, in the age group 0-14 there were only 75 accidental deaths by firearm in the entire US in 2005.

"I see you skip over the "well regulated " part."

Not at all. Since you're so familiar with the scholarship of the 2nd Amendment, I assumed that you already were familiar is USC 10.311, which defines who is in the militia. I'm in it, and likely so are you. So we're both in a well-regulated militia, or a militia that is codified under law.

In case you need a refresher:

http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C13.txt

Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section
313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a
declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States
and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the
National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the
Naval Militia.

"The world is rife with democracies that do not allow every person to go about armed at all times."

Indeed. But our recognizes that the right to arms does not stem from the government, it is an inherent right of a self-actualized and independent human being that exists independent of government. And I like ours better.

@antinous

"...as a buddhist you should really avoid killing people...

Yeah. If you're already fantasizing about defending yourself, you've got a big problem. Violence is a failure. Sometimes we fail, but it's better to do everything humanly possible to avoid it."

Exactly. You understand the difference between violence and force. As a Buddhist, I disown all forms of violence in self-defense. Force, as I have said above, is OK in self-defense under the Buddhist worldview, because using guns for self defense is not necessarily violence.

And I hope I never have to defend myself with any kind of force, lethal or otherwise, because I'll have to answer for it spiritually.

@takuan

"No one "needs" a gun."

Or a computer. Or the Internet. Or a car. Or a cell phone. Or...

Should we prohibit these things too? You can do harm with these things too, and quite easily at that.

"the American "constitutional" argument: nonsense, anyone who can read English knows the intent was never what exists now in terms of guns everywhere."

Wrong.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

There's loads more. Anyone who reads the Constitution and thinks that it was meant to disarm rather than protect a right to be armed is wrong.

And remember, if you say that "well, the 2nd is an anachronism and doesn't apply today" then you open the door for those like Bushie to say "well, the 4th, 1st, and 5th are anachronisms since 9-11 changed everything."

"I find myself wondering if our 'gun culture' were more pervasive, rather than the current state of things where some folks are totally enamored with them and others who vilify the first group, might the general level of responsible handling be higher?"

I do as well. Smallbore rifle used to be an option in gym class, now it's not because guns r teh evul.

The West Virginia state legislature is working on a bill to require that gun handling be taught in public schools, which I'm in favor of.

@songe

"and you should your self defense as an opportunity to show mercy and compassion towards your attacker."

Exactly. Buddhism is against *violence* in self-defense, but is OK with *force*. This is why one never shoots to *kill* an attacker, one shoots to *stop* an attacker. Regrettably, the fastest way to stop an attacker is by shooting them center mass and perhaps killing them, but if they cease their attack after being shot, we do not kill a defenseless person.

Secondly, has the attacker not caused his own pain and possible death by attacking? I would not shoot a random person if it wasn't in defense. Has the attacker not killed *himself*?

@Pat Dodds:

Google "subsitution effect". There is no indication that a significant number of people killed with a gun would still be alive if guns were banned. (note that I did not say "if guns were nonexistent". Criminals don't obey gun laws.) You're attempting a proof by induction.

Secondly, you have to look at overall violent crime rates, not just gun violence. Of course there was no gun violence in the Roman Empire, but that did not make it any less violent overall.

It's also interesting to note that robberies, assaults, burglaries, and total crimes are actually higher per capita in the United Kingdom. Gun crime in the UK is skyrocketing as well. Though murder rates in the UK are still lower than the US, the US is on a 20 year decline whiles the UK's violent crime rate is going up. Perception of safety is also lower in the UK.

It's the culture. I detest guns being shown on TV in the hands of criminals and thugs, because that promotes an ignorance and callousness towards guns in general.

"I also feel sorry for the #24 buddhist with a combat shotgun. does it get any wierder?"

How backhandedly intolerant of you.

Buddhism is perfectly compatible with armed self-defense:

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." --The Dalai Lama (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times)

"If we feel we cannot avoid maiming or killing [in self-defense], we can at least try to do it with regret at having to cause another pain. If our intention to cause harm is weak, the karmic effect of the act will be less." -- Buddhist Union, Oct. 96: 7

Armed resistance to those that would cause you death or harm is a profound service to one's own Buddha-nature.

"The one that results in God-knows how many injuries and fatalities a year in the US, and elsewhere?"

Error of logic: You assume that injuries and deaths resulting from people using guns would not have occurred if guns were removed. Google "substitution effect".

Error of composition #1: Guns are tools. If left on the top shelf of my safe, my 9mm will still be there 100 years later. It will not have grown little legs of its own and run around shooting people.

Error of composition #2: Subset of error of logic above. Societies exist where the overall level of crime and violence is higher, yet guns are banned or tightly restricted.

Error of composition #3: Americans shoot 9,000,000,000 rounds of ammunition yearly, just for practice. There are 13,500 murders by gun each year. Therefore, the primary purpose of guns is not killing humans, but simple recreation.

Why are you being so intolerant of those that make different life choices than you?

@#26

Well, bumpfiring is fun even if it's not accurate.

:)

I think that's a Beretta 92. What the man is doing is called a "bumpfire".

And the comments here from anti-gun people make me ashamed to be a liberal. The intolerance and bigotry towards guns here is staggering. Ugh.

What this man and his friends are doing in the YouTube videos did not result in harm to another living soul, or put anyone in danger. All guns were handled safely.

I'm a flaming liberal Democrat in favor of universal healthcare and gay marriage, and I'm a Buddhist.

I also own several guns, including a civilian defense rifle patterned after the AK-47, a bolt-action rifle with an 800m range, a compact pistol to carry with me, and a combat shotgun. I enjoy practical shooting matches. Of course, I do not hunt.

Gun control is fundamentally a bigoted, racist, sexist, ageist, statist idea that is *so* 20th century. Get with the program.

Note to American liberals like myself: This is what happens when they take your guns away. Don't fall for it.