Gun Control Debate: Why Do We Make Gun Violence So Easy?

[netman9]

Using your logic...lets ban the following:

lawn fertilizer
racing fuel
air travel

Sad to say LAWN FERTILIZER, ammonia nitrate, a form I and many have used, is no longer availible. (Timothy McVeigh)

I am amazed at the laws that are set today broken each time something of this scale happens. Not sure another dozen or so added would make any difference. I personally have been exposed to an unstable person that has been taken in by the highest of authorities on a very large scale without telling details. To my knowledge he is still free as he has done no wrong...

Another thing that bothers me is the media and how they cover certain events. While the national media was covering this Arizona event and the loss of 6 lifes this weekend a local person was stabed to death and covered by 10 seconds on the local news. To me no life is anymore important than the next and each should be treated with the same repsect no matter the back ground. Then the President showing up at the service last night which was more like a rally than paying respect to those being remembered.

[Catcher's Mitt]

i don't like what happened at all. it is horrible. I pray for all involved.

you are never, ever going to get rid of all the guns. and if you did what would you have? i dont even want to think about that. there are a lot of drugs that are illegal in this country and guess what? you can get them on most street corners. it would be the same with guns.

you don't hear much of these things happening in Louisiana Mississippi or Texas. probably other places where a lot of the folks are armed don't have a lot of that crazy gunman stuff. they are usually shot by a citizen before they get too far.

oh by the way. do you know what a pistol is for? it is to use to fight your way back to your rifle.

Chow

Mark

[GALAZIO]

Zummie let me break it down into it's basic form for ya.

Let's take POT/Weed/Ganga/whatever you call it.

It's illegal. Been banned... hell, even "controlled" to a point that it's "bad, bad stuff". Nancy & The Gipper declared a WAR against it.

Guess what?

It never slowed those down that want it, use it, sell it, or buy it. Some say, it's a great business to be in now... not unlike an arms trader to the other pussified countries that still attribute "human personality traits" to an object.

For instance: Guns have NEVER in the history of the world ASSAULTED anyone... but the idiots will call a paint job an "ASSAULT RIFLE/WEAPON", then when backed in a corner say in frustration, "you know what I mean".

Actually, I don't.

Take a Glock (bad example)... take a 1911, stick a round in the chamber, **** it, take the safety off and set it on a stump in the woods. come back in 100 years and guess what? it will still be sitting there... well behaved, loaded, cocked and without it's safety.

Using logic of those who think "guns are bad, guns should be hard to get, guns this, guns that..." are idiots.

If I wanted to walk up and kill someone, I could take a baseball bat... walk through a crowd without anyone saying a thing and bash the crap out of someone I wanted taken out. Trust me... it would be easier than a gun. Should we ban baseball bats?

Maybe, just maybe... it's the individual.

Now, that said, to get to the meat of the question; I have the RIGHT to purchase a weapon (guns are weapons, not tools). Just as it's a decision to wear shoes or flip flops... you decide for yourself, I'll respect your decision NOT to carry, but please respect my decision to carry.

And last thing... when the SHTF, tell the drugged up criminal who has a gun, knife or baseball bat at your wife's or kids head to hold on while you call the cops.

[GALAZIO]

You said it KAHI...if others in the Supermarket had been armed, this could of had a different outcome. Guns do not kill people! People kill people! Our founding fathers realized the importance of being armed citizens. Democracy was founded on the principle. Does anyone believe that our own govt does not respect the fact that its citizens are armed. The power in this country does not come down to a vote, it comes down to being armed.

Aces... if quoting our Founding Fathers, PLEASE keep in mind, the LAST thing they wanted was a DEMOCRACY. They founded a REPUBLIC. Plain and simple. But as Franklin warned:
AT THE CLOSE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what type of government the Constitution was bringing into existence. Franklin replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
... it seems we have lost our way. It starts with removing the word "democracy" from a sentence with or referring to the USA. Let's start small and get this ***** back on tract.

EDIT: I read this about once a month. It worth the quick summary:

Democracy Versus Republic

These succinct definitions of what is Democracy and what is a Republic was produced by the US Army in 1928, These definitions have been quietly withdrawn since, soon after.

Democracy:
A government of the masses.
Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression.
Results in mobocracy.
Attitude toward property is comunistic-negating property rights.
Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate. whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.
Results in demagogism license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.
Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success.
A certain Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship."
A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.

Republic:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.
Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure.
Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences.
A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass.
Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.
Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world.
A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of:
an executive and
a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create
a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize
certain inherent individual rights.
Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.
Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic."
A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.
Difference between Democracy and Republic, in brief:
Democracy:
a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority.
b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences

Republic
a: a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government.
b: a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.

Democracy and Republic are often taken as one of the same thing, but there is a fundamental difference. Whilst in both cases the government is elected by the people, in Democracy the majority rules according to their whims, whilst in the Republic the Government rule according to law. This law is framed in the Constitution to limit the power of Government and ensuring some rights and protection to Minorities and individuals.

The difference between Republic and Righteous Republic is that in the Republic the Government rules according to the law set up by men, in the Righteous Republic the law is the Law of God. Only in the Righteous Republic it can truly be said "One nation under God" for it is governed under commandments of the only One True God and there is no pluralism of religions.
Autocracy declares the divine right of kings; its authority can not be questioned; its powers are arbitrarily or unjustly administered.
Mobocracy: 1. Political control by a mob. 2. The mass of common people as the source of political control.

Saddest part is the directive of the DoD to remove this from the Army training manual. Makes ya wonder WHO really is running this ship.

[Doin'It]

Maybe if we looked at gun control from a gun owners point of view we might come up with some solutions that would work for everyone.

At one point in time I decided against buying a rifle I really wanted and thought it might be a good idea to buy a gun safe where I could control the guns I have acquired over the years. So, at the time I ended up with with one less gun but I had a place to safely store the others I already had. I did end up getting that rifle I wanted, AR-15, 223, halo scope, 30 round mags. Some call it an assault rifle, I call it "My Little Friend" it never talks back and it's always ready to go shoot'em up.

Maybe if our government offered a tax credit (like they do for solar energy equipment) for gun owners to purchase gun safes more guns would be controlled by their owners instead of being stolen by criminals out of responsible gun owners homes. How about this idea, homeowners insurance discount for having a gun safe to store guns and other important stuff in. Anyone else out there have some common sense ideas? Lets hear what you think.

As far as more laws go, we don't enforce the ones we have why bother writing more.


My preferred method of gun control.

[ElMar2530]

Nice safe!

[Avenger]

Take a Glock (bad example)... take a 1911,