Possibly the most retarded anti-gun ad I've ever seen...

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

The problem with gun control on any level is that it only burdens and punishes the law abiding citizen. Criminals don't follow laws.

You want a safer neighborhood or a safer nation, promote the value of life.

A person is required to be trained how to drive before driving a vehicle. No training is required to own and shoot a gun. The training that is required to carry a weapon that can be potentially used to take the life of another human being is much less than is required to drive a car. From a public safety perspective, how does that make any sense.

As a society, we share common space. All commercial guns begin their life cycle being produced by law abiding citizens. Yet somehow, some law abiding citizens allow the guns to be put in the hands of criminals either through negligence or deliberately.

What does a world look like where there is no gun control whatsoever?

As far as promoting the value of life, do you mean that from a religious point of view or another way?

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

A person is required to be trained how to drive before driving a vehicle. No training is required to own and shoot a gun. The training that is required to carry a weapon that can be potentially used to take the life of another human being is much less than is required to drive a car. From a public safety perspective, how does that make any sense.

As a society, we share common space. All commercial guns begin their life cycle being produced by law abiding citizens. Yet somehow, some law abiding citizens allow the guns to be put in the hands of criminals either through negligence or deliberately.

What does a world look like where there is no gun control whatsoever?

As far as promoting the value of life, do you mean that from a religious point of view or another way?

That's a straw-man argument. Even as well trained as we would like to think driver's are, more people die annually from cars than they do guns, by a long shot of 4 to 1 (no pun intended). And cars are much more indepth to operate than simple guns.

Top 7 Causes of Death
Since 1 Jan, 2013
Cause.....................Annually.....To Date
Tobacco:................529,000.....1,074,090
Medical Errors:.........195,000........395,931
Alcohol Abuse:.........107,400........218,067
Vehicle Accidents:.....42,000..........85,277
Suicide:...................29,350..........59,593
Drug Abuse:.............25,500..........51,776
Firearm Homicide...10,828..........21,985
http://seggleston.com/1/wp-content/custom/ds_index.php

Real time for 2015:
Abortion:................................34800
Heart Disease:.........................19011
Cancer:..................................18378
Tobacco:................................11154
Obesity:...................................9783
Medical Errors:...........................6692
Stroke:.....................................4109
Lower Respiratory Disease:...........4555
Accident (unintentional):..............4029
Hospital Associated Infection:.......3155
Alcohol:....................................3187
Diabetes:..................................2353
Alzheimer's Disease:....................2708
Influenza/Pneumonia:....................171
5Kidney Failure:..........................1363
Blood Infection:..........................1066
Suicide:....................................1259
Drunk Driving:............................1077
Unintentional Poisoning:...............1012
All Drug Abuse:............................797
Homicide:...................................535
Prescription Drug Overdose:...........478
Murder by gun:..........................366
Texting while Driving:....................191
Pedestrian:.................................159
Drowning:...................................125
Fire Related:...............................112
Malnutrition:................................88
Domestic Violence:.......................47
Smoking in Bed:...........................25
Falling out of Bed:........................18
Killed by Falling Tree:.....................4
Struck by Lightning:......................3
Mass Shooting:............................0
Spontaneous Combustion:..............0
http://www.romans322.com/daily-death...statistics.php

More info:
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/u...age-and-gender

A world without gun control is what we have now for the most part. Statically its actually pretty good. At least not as bad as those with an agenda would like you to think.
Here's something to think about, imagine a world without police.

Not a religious issue and not bringing religion into it. I mean the value of life that revolves around right and wrong and your right to take a life. If children were brought up to see the value of life in general, there might be less murders.

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

That's a straw-man argument. Even as well trained as we would like to think driver's are, more people die annually from cars than they do guns, by a long shot of 4 to 1 (no pun intended). And cars are much more indepth to operate than simple guns.
....

A world without gun control is what we have now for the most part. Statically its actually pretty good. At least not as bad as those with an agenda would like you to think.
Here's something to think about, imagine a world without police.

Not a religious issue and not bringing religion into it. I mean the value of life that revolves around right and wrong and your right to take a life. If children were brought up to see the value of life in general, there might be less murders.

Finally found some time to think about this and sit down to reply.

While guns are far simpler mechanically as well as operationally than cars, I would argue that they are just as complex when it comes to safety and awareness. In Minnesota, a three hour course is all that’s needed training wise to get a carry permit. It seems unrealistic to me to prepare any person to carry a gun and truly understand the situation they’re potentially preparing to deal with in that short of a time let alone be aware of how the situation might affect their own abilities once if they find themselves in that position. If the conservative argument is such that the best crime prevention is an armed public, why is there not rigorous training and testing required to ensure a civilian is trained well enough to actually do the deed if it comes to that?

I don't have data to back this up, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb here by saying that the number of guns being operated per day on an annual basis is several orders of magnitude smaller than the number of vehicles being operated. The 4-1 argument will likely look much different if considered based on deaths by a percentage of use.

Using the top 7 causes of death you provided, firearm homicide is the only event where another human being is actively violating another person’s right to exist without being injured and/or killed (I saw abortion in the other data set and I’m not going to touch that one.) Everything else is bad self care, negligence, or bad luck. It’s a different type of event to be actively killed by another person versus not. It’s more traumatic to survivors at the least.

I guess I just think more can be done to prevent things like school shootings and the like. If you leave your gun accessible and your child picks it up and shoots up the school, there should be some significant jail time for not properly locking your shit up and securing it. I would assume the authors of the 2nd amendment implied personal responsibility.


Not sure where you're coming from with a world without police. I'm not for that and not sure who is.

[AJ]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

If you leave your gun accessible and your child picks it up and shoots up the school, there should be some significant jail time for not properly locking your shit up and securing it.

There is. The owners/parents are held responsible in a lot of these case. Now every situation is going to be slightly different, but it's not something people turn a blind eye to. I've very protective of what I keep in my house, how I keep it in my house, and how it needs to be ready in case of self defense use. If i'm not I only have myself to blame and my actions shouldn't take away the rights of others who are following the laws.

My wife and I both have our carry permits. I agree that the standard class as we took it isn't enough. Thought others would say they shouldn't have to take a class to protect themselves and I agree with that as well. The reason I don't think the class is enough is someone doesn't really have to pay attention to the class to get it. Go through it, hit a target, pay $, done. When we did it I asked for a single class with only my wife and I and made sure he brought in some intro to handgun aspects for my wife. She needs to feel comfortable and secure with any gun she choose to have. It just so happens that is an full size M&P .45 with a wonderful Apex trigger kit.

In the end I wish the money spent to fight gun control was spent on disarming criminals and helping those with mental conflicts that lead them to improper use.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

Finally found some time to think about this and sit down to reply.

While guns are far simpler mechanically as well as operationally than cars, I would argue that they are just as complex when it comes to safety and awareness. In Minnesota, a three hour course is all that’s needed training wise to get a carry permit. It seems unrealistic to me to prepare any person to carry a gun and truly understand the situation they’re potentially preparing to deal with in that short of a time let alone be aware of how the situation might affect their own abilities once if they find themselves in that position. If the conservative argument is such that the best crime prevention is an armed public, why is there not rigorous training and testing required to ensure a civilian is trained well enough to actually do the deed if it comes to that?

I don't have data to back this up, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb here by saying that the number of guns being operated per day on an annual basis is several orders of magnitude smaller than the number of vehicles being operated. The 4-1 argument will likely look much different if considered based on deaths by a percentage of use.

Using the top 7 causes of death you provided, firearm homicide is the only event where another human being is actively violating another person’s right to exist without being injured and/or killed (I saw abortion in the other data set and I’m not going to touch that one.) Everything else is bad self care, negligence, or bad luck. It’s a different type of event to be actively killed by another person versus not. It’s more traumatic to survivors at the least.

I guess I just think more can be done to prevent things like school shootings and the like. If you leave your gun accessible and your child picks it up and shoots up the school, there should be some significant jail time for not properly locking your shit up and securing it. I would assume the authors of the 2nd amendment implied personal responsibility.


Not sure where you're coming from with a world without police. I'm not for that and not sure who is.

I agree a 3 hour course is not enough. But I doubt even a 3 day course would be enough to mentally prepare somebody for a life threatening situation should it spontaneously arise without warning. Maybe 3 months of military training might, but thats unrealistic for the general populous.
But the Bill of Rights guarantees you and me the right to keeps and bare arms. Notice its a "Right" and not "Permit" which really makes the CCP a farse anyway. Now I will say that anybody found guilty in a court of law of commiting a crime using a gun should have their rights to own or possess a firearm stripped away and severe consequences if found with a firearm later.
The conservative argument has facts and data on its side showing that when a city/town/municipality allows it citizens CCP gun ownership, crime rates drop by a good margine because criminals are less likely to go after a victim if there is a strong possibility that they are carrying. I'm sure that if your life was threatened you'd rather be armed than not.

I agree that the number of guns fired daily vs cars driven is much lower, so where was the problem with guns again? Not trying to be funny with that statement, just trying to put it into perspective. I can't think of a gun owner I know that doesn't either shoot their guns at ranges or outdoors on some type of regular basis. They get plenty of trigger time and live to tell the tale.

Sure it takes a human being with a gun to kill another human being. Same as a baseball bat, knife, hammer, crowbar, etc. So why do we keep blaming the gun? And that goes for school shootings too. Take away the gun and it would be school knifings (we have those), school bombings (we have those) school beheadings (we have those) and so on. That's where my statement about teaching the value of life comes in, its not the gun, its the individual.

Alan addressed the child and gun issue very well, so I won't touch on that.

My comment about a world without police revolves around whats happening with police getting turned into targets these days by race baiters, protestors, politicians, etc. And those same groups are doing the same thing to gun owners. Sure there are some bad cops out there, just as there are bad criminals with guns. But we can't say all cops are bad because thats just not reality, the same as saying all gun owners are dangerous. So do you want all cops gone because of a few bad apples? Same thing goes for gun owners. Either one could save your life at any given time.

Alan's point about getting guns out of criminals hands leads me back to this pic I posted earlier,....



And if you really get pass the emotion and think about it, why go after lawful gun ownership and not criminals? Seriously think about that.

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

But the Bill of Rights guarantees you and me the right to keeps and bare arms. Notice its a "Right" and not "Permit" which really makes the CCP a farse anyway.

This discussion is causing me to hit the limits of my thoughts and knowledge on 2nd amendment rights, so I'm doing some research into what the 2nd amendment actually means. The first legal case I've come across that set a precedent for the 2nd amendment was United States v. Cruikshank on March 27, 1876. Relating to the 2nd amendment, in a nutshell the Supreme Court interpreted it as limiting the federal government's powers on our right to bear arms. According to the ruling, it does not affect states rights to restrict gun rights.

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

The conservative argument has facts and data on its side showing that when a city/town/municipality allows it citizens CCP gun ownership, crime rates drop by a good margine because criminals are less likely to go after a victim if there is a strong possibility that they are carrying. I'm sure that if your life was threatened you'd rather be armed than not.

I'll look into the CCP crime rate data to see what I can find. I'm open to
shift my opinion if I can find solid data.

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

Sure it takes a human being with a gun to kill another human being. Same as a baseball bat, knife, hammer, crowbar, etc. So why do we keep blaming the gun? And that goes for school shootings too. Take away the gun and it would be school knifings (we have those), school bombings (we have those) school beheadings (we have those) and so on. That's where my statement about teaching the value of life comes in, its not the gun, its the individual.

Guns came into existence as a result of a drive to win wars with a more efficient weapon. They are more efficient, with the exception of bombs. But, guns are much more readily available and usable than bombs. Nobody is arguing for the right to carry bombs.

I just randomly pulled up the 2011 CDC Homicide data and firearm homicides accounted for 68% of all homicides that year.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

My comment about a world without police revolves around whats happening with police getting turned into targets these days by race baiters, protestors, politicians, etc. And those same groups are doing the same thing to gun owners. Sure there are some bad cops out there, just as there are bad criminals with guns. But we can't say all cops are bad because thats just not reality, the same as saying all gun owners are dangerous. So do you want all cops gone because of a few bad apples? Same thing goes for gun owners. Either one could save your life at any given time.

To get into what is happening with the protests and race, we should probably start a different thread lol. On your other point though, I am not for having all guns banned, but I still believe in some level of gun control that is above the current levels.

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

Gun control laws will not get guns out of the hands of criminals. The idea is to minimize opportunities for criminals to get guns that are not currently in their hands while allowing the lawful public to still have guns. The idea of disarming the public is a scare tactic to get people fired up.

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

And if you really get pass the emotion and think about it, why go after lawful gun ownership and not criminals? Seriously think about that.

I will give it serious thought. I haven't quite figured out yet whether you are for no gun control whatsoever though, or for no more than there already is.

I understand your argument about punishing lawful folks for a few bad apples. I'm not even unsympathetic to the argument. I just don't believe there's a cut and dry answer.

On the subject, Japan has one of the lowest homicide rates in the world along with strict gun control laws.