Dumbest Thing I've read today, via the internet......

Par4QC · 2017-10-03T21:58:45+00:00

"These people who don't even live in the U.S., the last best hope of man on Earth, think they know what's best for us." But........we know what's best for...

puttnfool

JeffTilley it's no use. They can find a website written by a stupid liberal for every website you post authored by a knowledgeable conservative.

The only thing that makes any sense is the fact that criminals are always going to have their guns. All I know, is that when someone comes in the door with a gun whether I'm at home, at the grocery store, a movie, or anywhere in between, I want to have a fair shake in determining whether I live or die. You'd think that'd be elementary, but apparently it is not.

puttnfool

Sneakylong

In 2007, former cop and volunteer security worker, Jeanne Assam, saved the day at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Thousands of people were exiting from Sunday mass that day as the shooter opened fire. However, Assam ran toward the line of fire, killing the shooter and saving countless lives.

An 18-year-old mother saved the life of herself and her baby in Blanchard, Oklahoma. There, a knife-wielding intruder was attempting to enter Sarah McKinley's mobile home shortly after her husband died of lung cancer in 2012. After breaking in, McKinley fired, killing one suspect and scaring the other intruder off.

puttnfool

A 71-year-old man saved the lives of many at an internet cafe in Florida in 2012. When robbers entered the cafe with weapons, Samuel Williams pulled out his gun and scared off the suspects.

puttnfool

... and many more...

puttnfool

Check out this video of Tucker Carlson embarrassing some stupid lawyer.

LBlack14

puttnfool
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt"

Tucker's good and these folks are fast to remove all doubt.

puttnfool

LBlack14 my favorite part is when his eye blinks uncontrollably when he knows he's spewing total bullshit.

Spuzz

LBlack14 "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt"

I was just thinking that as I read through this thread.

puttnfool

Another...

http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/10/991022-anti-gun-reporter-spent-months-researching-case-gun-control-no-one-expected-final-results/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_term=ijamerica

JeffTilley

Sneakylong

Dude, every time you use Mother Jones, Slate, Vox, Huffpost, or a myriad of other liberal thought police websites for your sourcing, I just gotta sit back and smfh. Try using statistics gathered by a legit source for once, not some made up liberal shit. They cherry pick data so it fits their narrative.

rsvman

He may be cherry picking data from liberal websites, but there's no argument that people with a gun in their home are less safe, not safer, from gun violence. One you bring that gun into your home you make it more likely, not less likely, that somebody in your home is going to be injured by a gun.

Why? Because now there's a gun in your home. An intruder didn't bring it there, you did. Overestimating the risk of an armed intruder is at the root of the problem. They are not coming for you. Therefore your family is safe from gun violence unless you introduce the weapon into the home, then all bets are off.

Seems like it would be elementary, but apparently it is not.

JeffTilley

rsvman rsvman

Show me some unbiased numbers here-how many lives lost by gun vs how many saved by gun, in the home. Remember, unbiased. And here’s a nugget for you-why are you 3 times more likely to be a victim of violent crime in urban areas vs rural areas, when gun control is much more strict in urban areas?

PA-PLAYA

rsvman

See, this is the exact mindset that unlawful criminals want activists to have, the mindset that really pinpoints the fallacies of the liberal arguments as it relates to 2A.
If I’m a thief/criminal in the business of casing homes for burglaries - which homes am I more targeting - homes that are owned by people who have no means of personal defense, or homeowners who do?

Do you honestly think I’m just gonna let a drug-induced criminal break my door in at 2:00 in the morning, threaten my family, steal and vandalize my personal property, without having some means to defend my family and my property?

I don’t give a fuck what the statistics are, as long as I have the ability to not become one of them.

I’ve broken no laws. I keep my firearms secure, like a responsible gun owner should. I see absolutely no reason why my preference would put you or anyone else at risk, unless of course you decide I have something you want inside my house and are willing to risk your life to trespass my property and take it unlawfully.

I just described an overwhelming majority of legal gun owners in this country.

Wanna do some good - go after the criminals, gangbangers and drug dealers who cause 95% of the gun-related deaths in this country.

People are up in arms over Vegas, but more people were killed in Chicago last month.

Address the real problem.

puttnfool

rsvman So, you think when an intruder comes in with a gun, they're just gonna leave you alone as long as you don't bother them?

puttnfool

rsvman Seems like it would be elementary, but apparently it is not.

You know what they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Sneakylong

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/scientists-agree-guns-dont-make-society-safer/

I suppose you think all the data showing guns in homes don't make you safer are fake news. Whatever.

Explain this then. Why do countries with tighter gun laws have less gun deaths? No correlation between less guns / stricter laws = less gun deaths vs. more guns / weak laws = more gun deaths? Just a coincidence I suppose. 🙄

Bottom line is the countries fetish with guns isn't going away. And even though the Second Amendment says the right to bear arms in order to form a well regulated militia and nothing about having an arsenal of high powered weapons in your home to fight off a home invasion.

Nothing is going to change.

So, let the irrational fear continue as we'll surely see increases in suicides, accidents, murders and mass shootings all so the gun manufacturers can sell more guns to an overly armed paranoid country .

JeffTilley

Sneakylong

Why do cities like Chicago and Baltimore have higher crime by gun even though they have stricter gun control?

raggmann54

Sneakylong The 2nd Amendment states - "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It doesn't say what your wrote - "...even though the Second Amendment says the right to bear arms in order to form a well regulated militia and nothing about having an arsenal of high powered weapons in your home to fight off a home invasion." It doesn't say forming a militia, doesn't say you cannot have more than a certain number of firearms and makes no mention of caliber of firearm we, as law-abiding citizens, may have.

rsvman

PA-PLAYA your preference doesn't put me at risk at all. It puts your family at risk, not me. I have no problem at all with you having guns in your home. It doesn't concern me in the least.

And just to set the record straight, I'm not advocating repeal of the second amendment out anything remotely close to it. I'm just engaging in a discussion. As long as you understand that your family is at higher risk of gun violence inside your home because of your choice to bring a gun into your home, you are absolutely free to do so.
There are obviously ways of keeping your family safe from your guns, and I hope you take all necessary measures.

puttnfool

PA-PLAYA Address the real problem.

Can you post that again so I can "like" it again?

Weirfan

JeffTilley

pretty common sense but just in case

https://blog.uwgb.edu/alltherage/debunking-pro-gun-arguments-but-what-about-chicago/

similarly , our gun laws are on the strict side of things and despite very low gun deaths and with many weapons being banned including certain hand guns and semi/automatic weapons. They still find their way into some hands and over 90% of those prohibited guns involved come from the US where they are legal. there is no doubt that gun deaths would skyrocket if those types of weapons were more easily accessible legal here.

Sneakylong

raggmann54

You're confused as to my post. I was using sarcasm with the arsenal comment.

However IMO the Second Amendment is out dated. There is no threat from a foreign militia. We now have the National Guard, Armed Forces, Police etc.. There's no need for rural farmers to be armed in order to form a militia and fight the British in a minutes notice with musket rifles. And the fighting tyranny argument became a moot point years ago. Good luck fighting tyranny against the arsenal of the Armed Forces.

Having said that the Heller case is the law, but there can be limits imposed. I would argue one common sense limit would be not being able to amass an arsenal the likes of the Las Vegas shooter amassed in such a short time.

Along with enhanced background checks it seems reasonable for some red flags to go up when someone buys so many assault weapons in such a short time period. This is just the type common sense thing that gun rights advocates and gun safety people could agree on.

But the NRA is only interested in one thing. Selling more guns. So, don't hold your breath.

JeffTilley

Weirfan

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/

Weirfan

JeffTilley

lol ....more shinola and distortion there than at a Trump speech

candukid

JeffTilley
oh so that's what an un-biased website looks like...gee whiz.

JeffTilley

Weirfan

Please debunk it.............

http://www.gunfacts.info/infographics/

Weirfan

rsvman
thought this portion of a well written , balanced article on the subject supports your stance .

"If there’s a commonality between the pro-gun and anti-gun divide, it’s that people feel the world is unsafe (despite the fact that the world, including the US, has become increasingly more safe in terms of homicide). On the one hand, suburban, white parents who are strongly anti-gun are up in arms (pun intended) about gun control because they feel their children are endangered in places where they shouldn’t be (in contrast, inner-city gun violence among black youth doesn’t tend to spark national talk of gun control). And so, banning guns completely seems like a rational solution. On the other hand, pro-gun advocates have similar concerns, but they feel that arming themselves is the only way to keep them safe. In their view, more permissive gun laws allowing open-carry and concealed-carry firearms or arming teachers with guns in schools is therefore the sensible path.

From a psychological perspective, it’s less important whether guns actually make us safer and more important whether guns make us feel safer. But nonetheless, let’s start with some “facts.” The preponderance of available evidence indicates that having a gun in the home is associated with a greater risk of accidental death, homicide, suicide, and a greater risk especially of female and childhood death by firearm.3 As a result, the significant public health risk of firearm ownership has become a known dictum in the medical literature. What’s much less well known is whether firearm ownership really prevents violent victimization. Methodologically, it’s extremely difficult to detect a deterrent effect of gun ownership, when preventative outcomes are hypothetical (i.e. in cases of purported gun self-defense, it isn’t really possible to know what would have happened if one didn’t have a gun in the same situation)."

full article here
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/psych-unseen/201510/the-psychology-guns

PA-PLAYA

rsvman

I was simply being rhetorical in my response. But thank you for the reply anyway.

My guns are safe... in a safe. My wife and I are the only ones who know the combination lock. Not sure how that creates a situation where it puts my family at more risk. I would argue it actually puts my family at less risk. My wife and my son (26 years old) have gone to the local gun club (which I'm a member) with me on several occasions to learn how to safely and securely use firearms. I have a legal CC permit, which was obtained through the local Sheriff's department. All firearms I've purchased have required extensive background checks, through the proper channels. Being former military - I have a deeper respect for firearms and their lethality, granted. But still - my secured firearms, whether concealed carry on my person, or at home in my safe, I see as an insurance policy that I hope that I, or my family, never have to cash in on.

Not all of us are George Zimmerman's looking for trouble.

The only people at-risk are those who foolishly see me, my family, or my home/property as a soft-target.

« Previous Page Next Page »