Guns save lives

[penkitten]

Yep, sorry Goundra, hate to break it to you...but you are OUT! :moon:

excuse me , who?
and out ... of what?

 

[penkitten]

It seems someone is finally looking at the causes of these incidents.....


And strangely enough, he found some more very strong links of these mass shootings to medications.


http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant-gaping-hole-in-sandy-hook-reporting/

thank you danger. that was exactly what i was talking about. i also thought that was a very well pointed link.

 

[Who Dares Win]

It seems someone is finally looking at the causes of these incidents.....


And strangely enough, he found some more very strong links of these mass shootings to medications.


http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant-gaping-hole-in-sandy-hook-reporting/

Thats a very interesting article, is that site politically biased? I would like to forward that link to a friend with which I recently talked about guns but she is arab....so some nationalist site wouldnt exactly be the best thing.

 

[goundra]

only if you are foolish enough to hold property in your own name, and/or hang around after such a thing occurs, which I am not.

 

[5string]

The article said that the guy she shot is on the verge of death. I hope he doesn't die, even if it is only for the sake of her conscious. His crime is burglary, and there is no legal justification for killing someone to defend property. The idea might be popular, but that doesn't make it legal.

No one has the legal right to shoot somebody just because that person is in their house. The "castle doctrine" is part of self-defense law, and it always requires a reasonable belief of impending harm. An intruder simply being there is not enough. He would have had to threaten her with the crowbar, too, before she shot him. I don't know if that happened, but despite what everybody seems to think, even if he's in your house you can't sneak up on a burglar and blow him away before he knows what is going on. That's murder.

Misguided Bible Belt.

If somebody breaks into my home and is walking through it with a weapon, am I supposed to kindly ask him if he's there to eat some chocolate chip cookies, steal my flat screen or rape my wife?

In my state, it does not matter why someone broke into my house. Once he's in, I can legally smoke him.

 

[Bible_Belt]

In my state, it does not matter why someone broke into my house. Once he's in, I can legally smoke him.

That's true only if you feel a reasonable belief of impending physical harm. No one can shoot a trespasser simply for being there. The trespasser might not be intent on causing you harm. A retired cop shot his own kid not too long ago, thinking he was a burglar. Your intruder could be the paper boy trying to collect, a meter reader, a lost deliveryman, the neighbor's mentally handicapped kid or even a cop. Swat teams sometimes raid the wrong address and get shot by homeowners, who inevitably get charged with murder of a cop.

Plus, all of that is relevant only to the state-level criminal charge. You could still face Federal criminal charges or a civil suit at either (or both) the state and Federal level. The circumstances under which you can get completely away with killing someone are much more limited than most people realize.

 

[Burroughs]

The circumstances under which you can get completely away with killing someone are much more limited than most people realize.

Unless your name is Casey Anthony and you have to have your nights free to go skanking...but she no doubt gave the judge a REAL NICE BJ....and anyone else's azz she could lick to get her off

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/ne...ives-overlook-crucial-google-search-evidence/

 

[Poonani Maker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtyKofFih8Y enjoy

 

[Burroughs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtyKofFih8Y enjoy

surprise surprise

british wasp boy english faggot wants guns removed

didn't these rothschild buttfvck british try this on us 200+ years ago

once the guns are gone

the people are fully enslaved

there is no debate

there is only those with power

and those without

 

[Robert28]

Let's lay it out like this in simple terms. If someone who I do not know (or maybe I know them) and they FORCE their way into my house you better believe they are getting a bullet to the head. If they kick my door in, bullet to the head. If they pry open a window with a crowbar, bullet to the head. If I open the door and they push it open knocking me to the ground, again....bullet to the head. If I come home and find someone in my home that's not supposed to be there, bullet to the head. If you try to carjack me, bullet to the head. If you start smashing my car windows and acting like a deranged maniac, you too get a bullet to the head. If you come onto my property and pull out a knife and threaten to kill me with it, pull out a gun and threaten to kill me with it, pull out a baseball bat and utter the words "I'm about to smash your skull in!", guess what you win....yep, bullet to the head. In ANY of the aformentioned cases, I'm not going to wound you, I'm going to KILL you. The law says I can use force that's neccessary to stop the threat, and I will do just that when I put one right between your eyes. I'm not going to start shoot aimlessly and hope I hit you and you fall down, I'm going to draw down on you and make the front part of your brain exit out of the back of your skull. When you buy a gun for self/home defense you better have the mindset that you will kill someone if you have to. Don't buy a gun for protection just to scare anyone, you better make your mind up long before then. Drawing down on someone is the absolute LAST measure of action you should take because when I draw my pistol it's going to be fired, so when you see it come out you better kiss your @$$ goodbye and wait for the flash because it's coming.

Now, for those wanting to keep guns away from the crazies. There is already a part on the form you fill out when you buy a gun that asks if you have any mental health issues. if you lie on that form then that's on you. If we are going to pass laws to keep guns out of these crazy peoples possession then why should we allow them to vote in elections?

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

It seems someone is finally looking at the causes of these incidents.....


And strangely enough, he found some more very strong links of these mass shootings to medications.


http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/the-giant-gaping-hole-in-sandy-hook-reporting/

Don't mistake correlation with causality.

A high number of shooters were on meds.

That either means that:

1) the meds were causing the shootings

2) the shootings were causing the meds

3) something else was causing both of them

The article suggests that number 1 is correct. Number 2 is obviously impossible.

But I suspect number 3 may very well be what's going on.

Nutjobs kill people

Nutjobs are usually on some kind of medication.

Therefore, nutjobs who kill people are likely on some kind of medication.

mass killers and serial killers have certainly been around a lot longer than some of the drugs mentioned in that article.

Also keep in mind that the author of that article has also authored a book putting over-medicating in a negative light, so of course he's going to use that angle in mass killings.

One other article that I read also showed some correlation between the rate of committing people to the nuthouse with the amount of mass shooting.

Before the 80's most nutjobs were in the loony bin. But after the 80's, when nutters were out roaming the streets, these mass killings started happening more frequently.

While I think that there is too much a tendency to prescribe any number of drugs, I think a better solution would be to just lock up the nutjobs.

Of course, the BEST solution would just be to ARM everybody.

 

[goundra]

Bad idea to think that drawing means firing. normally, it does NOT. when they see the gun, they STOP. if you hit someone with a bullet, figure on spending $50,000 to stay out of jail, pay bondsman's fees, lost work, having to relocate, having wife and kids harassed, possible divorce, being sued for everything you own, etc.

 

[The Gambler]

Bad idea to think that drawing means firing. normally, it does NOT. when they see the gun, they STOP. if you hit someone with a bullet, figure on spending $50,000 to stay out of jail, pay bondsman's fees, lost work, having to relocate, having wife and kids harassed, possible divorce, being sued for everything you own, etc.

Oh really? If you shoot someone who has forcibly broken into your residence, which is a class A felony?

If you really believe what you're saying, let's have a friendly bet. I'll bet you $500 that this case (of the woman who did the shooting) never goes past the grand jury. My side of the bet is that the shooting will be considered justified.

They don't call me the Gambler for nothing. But in this case, I'm not too worried about losing.

 

[goundra]

yes, even then, in some states, bud. you don't want to find out the hard way. Massachusetts, for instance, forces you to FLEE your home, if possible, rather than to even THREATEN use of deadly force. the same jurisdiction does not always respond in the same way, either. If a racially charged area, for instance, has another shooting of the same type as got everyone riled up, woe betide the "defender" who killed on of that "touchy" racial group. Just ask 4 cops who did nothing more than subdue a certain guy, out West, a while back. MUCH worse cases of police beatings have occurred, the 4 cops got off, state law wise, then had to serve time in the Fed system, for "civil rights violations". Dont kid yourself, you dont know the law in all 50 states, all the time, much less how people there will ALWAYS react.

 

[Alle_Gory]

It's a crock of ****. The more guns the higher the violence, or maybe is it the other way around? Either way, guns don't save lives they make the chance of death more inevitable. Mistakes happen all the time.

Yes when guns are outlawed only the criminals will have them, but what are the chances of a regular person being able to stand up to an armed criminal? Not likely. Regular people aren't used to killing to defend themselves.

Here in Canada we don't have as much gun violence and especially mass shootings, on the other hand our government is more fearful of the populace. So maybe that's something down guys up south need to work on. Remind the government who they serve and not the other way around. Your police are way over equipped and trigger happy bordering on psychotic. Maybe that's somewhere to start.

 

[Bible_Belt]

There's no going back, though. There's 200 million privately owned firearms in the US. Even if you stopped making new ones, a gun lasts a very long time, possibly hundreds of years. Australia enacted gun registration as a ruse to later confiscate all of the registered firearms, so that trick has already been played. There are countless paranoid rednecks right now who are stockpiling untraceable firearms, just in case the Australia scenario plays out here. The US government knows that, which makes it even less likely to happen.

If you ever watch the US presidential elections, you know the 'red state/blue state' divide. The blue is the more urban area and the red is larger in geography, but more rural. It is a cultural divide, more so than political, going back as far as the Civil War. The blue states might be open to gun control, which is common in big cities, but the predominant attitude where I live is like the bumper sticker - they can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers. If the law changes too drastically, everybody will ignore it, not just criminals.

 

[The Gambler]

Regular people aren't used to killing to defend themselves.

You have apparently forgotten the original post that started this thread.

That woman had no problem pumpin' a few into that a**hole.

 

[goundra]

I have personally stopped several attacks on my person by drawing my gun. Against men, I have done the same on dogs. The only time that I have actually had to fire was on a dog. I brained him with one shot from a .22lr and he fell so instantly that I could hear his chin hit the pavement. You try to take my private property, especially my weapons, at the risk of your life, period. We have a saying in the gun community. It is Greek, "Molon Labe". it means "come take them". It is what the Spartan King Leonidas said in response to being outnumbered by 100 to one by the Persians at Thermopayle and being told to surrender their arms. If you want a civil war and shtf, just TRY it.

 

[Poonani Maker]

If you ever watch the US presidential elections, you know the 'red state/blue state' divide. The blue is the more urban area and the red is larger in geography, but more rural. It is a cultural divide, more so than political, going back as far as the Civil War. The blue states might be open to gun control, which is common in big cities, but the predominant attitude where I live is like the bumper sticker - they can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers. If the law changes too drastically, everybody will ignore it, not just criminals.

There's group, can't remember what they call themselves, but they don't believe in car tags, etc, and if a police pulls them over they shoot em. It could get Really bad here in America if they try to "CONfiscate" door-to-door, guns. There's already elements growing. It could get, and they are just making it/pushing it, worse.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

These mass shootings were a lot rarer in the past even though guns were more accessible.

There's another variable that is confusing the issue. Before, there were less mass shootings, less of these drugs

AND

most of these nutjobs were locked up in the loony bin.

Are there more mass shootings because they started letting nutjobs loose on the street, or because they started these drugs?

No way to tell for sure, only speculate.

Bottom line, nutjobs or not, loony tunes walking in broad day light or not, guns really don't kill that many people.

Accidents, smoking, alcoholism, even medical mistakes all kill more people than guns.