Cases Where Citizens Repealed Attackers With A Firearm

[dejapooh]

"Don't be a member of the party of ignorance" could be construed as name calling....Are you guys going to jump on him? Or is this part of the old double standard like the mainstream media does?

Yet, I support my claim with some evidence. Given the nature of my statement, the nature of the link I provided, I would say that it is appropriate. What would you call those who try to stop research because they may disagree with the results. They are obviously not interested in finding out truth. Those who do not attempt to find out the truth are doomed to ignorance... In the US, there is only one party that is promoting ignorance of science.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[dejapooh]

But why is the earth warming, I cant say for sure, few can. Viva la pistole.

Science can't say for sure how Electricity works. It's all just theory. Then again, it works. Science says where the evidence points. Science tries to give rational explanations based on evidence. Theory has been commandeered by popular culture to mean something like an idea or a possible explanation, but in Science it is much much more. Ideas become hypothesis. Evidence from direct experimentation is then collected and used to refine that hypothesis into a new hypothesis. Given a period of time, the basics behind the hypothesis start to become seen as true. Only after years of testing and retesting can a hypothesis become a theory. A theory is a highly supported hypothesis that explains a natural phenomena.

 

[dejapooh]

It has been failed to mention that there are 2 groups of people that don't own fire arms. 1. The people that want government to do everything from health care to taking care of them when they are being robbed either in their homes or when they are out. It ends up being the police officers fault when they, the police, are 10 to 20 minutes away and can't get there in time to stop it. The other group is the criminals that are robbing the person that wants the government to do everything. The criminal doesn't own a gun because he isn't about to register what he or she is using to rob the person that thinks that guns are necessary in life preservation. I thank God that my father was a sinceable sharecroppers son from the 1930s that bought my mother a 1914 Smith and Wesson 32/20, when I was a kid, because we had a pepping tom and taught her how to us it in the backyard. As a result the pipping tom when heard the report of the 32/20, that lived down the street didn't come back. People that do register their fire arms end up on the wrong end of this equation because the fact that they are on the books makes them the target of the people that want the government to do everything and as the result are getting robbed. I for plan on keeping my Remington 1100 12ga. and my Taurus 24/7 OSS Tactical in 45 ACP. The one that accosts my wife will have to silence the 45 to do it!!

Lets not forget the part of the population that realizes that by owning firearms, you increase the likelihood of violent confrontations, you increase the likelihood of accidental shooting, and you increase the likelihood of wasting money on a dangerous object that is unlikely to ever serve and useful purpose.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Lets not forget the part of the population that realizes that by owning firearms, you increase the likelihood of violent confrontations, you increase the likelihood of accidental shooting, and you increase the likelihood of wasting money on a dangerous object that is unlikely to ever serve and useful purpose.

Tell that to the 10,s of thousands of people that use their weapons to save the lives of their families, friends and theirselves as well as their property every year...

 

[packerbacker]

I hope my life insurance is unlikely to ever serve a useful purpose as well.
I hope my extra food and water is never needed in an emergency.
I hope my spare tire is there just for looks.
I hope my first aid kit is never used.
I hope my dangerous objects never get used except for hunting and target shooting.
I hope those that don't own dangerous objects never need one.

 

[pong12211]

Lets not forget the part of the population that realizes that by owning firearms, you increase the likelihood of violent confrontations, you increase the likelihood of accidental shooting, and you increase the likelihood of wasting money on a dangerous object that is unlikely to ever serve and useful purpose.

Whoa seriously.. Hey buddy let me tell you a stone cold fact.. I live in north central Pa. and anybody that's ever been to this area knows how seriously we take our hunting.. Every year on the first monday after thanksgiving we take to the woods for the opening day of deer season.. How many you ask a million plus.. Guess what none of us take our dangerous guns out to kill anybody or harm anyone.. Most of us are versed in firearm saftey and always treat it with respect.. Guess what the first monday after Thanksgiving I wonder how many crimminals are walking around with firearms looking to do harm to people.. Simple fact my guns ar'nt as you put dangerous.. The people carrying them are ultimatley responsible for the decsions made with them.. So don't go spouting they have no useful purpose.. Because heritage and rights are important to some of us and that's a pretty important purpose in my opinion...

 

[packerbacker]

as for global warming.....if I were a scientist getting grant money to research something, I wouldn't bite the hand that's feeding me.

 

[dieselram94]

Dejapooh, you are as closed minded as anyone could be....what facts did you have to Support your claims firearms promote violence instead of deter violence? I live in a very rural area and for the police to respond would be about 45 mins. You don't think my guns are quite a deterent? Facts please.

 

[dejapooh]

You guys misunderstand Dieselram. He is passionate but no fool. I like to read his posts as if he was a buddy of mine sharing a pint at the pub. Dieselram knows that I tend more towards the liberal side. He also knows that I have no desire to take away guns; he understands my trepidation but disagrees. I seriously doubt he thinks I am mentally deficient...but you never know.

When I talk with my more conservative leaning friends they will make similar comments about liberals, but every one of them would trust me with their life...and me the same. It doesn't get personal until somebody makes a comparison to Hitler...then it goes too far.

Crispin

I have many conservative friends, they know that there are only 2 things I will not tolerate in a discussion. Name calling and Hyperbole.

 

[dejapooh]

That is a very valid point. I also believe that banning any other weapons now is a lot like closing the barn door after the horse ran away, was picked up by a rustler, sold into the war, was captured by the enemy, trained and entered into a race, and finally died of old age after fathering many foals.

 

[dejapooh]

What the heck country are we talking about anyway

For arguments sake, let's say this whole 2nd amendment thing came to a popular vote in the US, and it was voted by a majority, a majority I mind you, and it was decided to repeal the 2nd amendment. What do you do? Go to war against the majority?

The entire point of the bill of rights is to protect the minority against the tyranny of the majority. That is why basic rights should never be put up to a vote. No one will vote against a christian's right to display what he wants on his property... But an Atheist? Atheists regularly put up legally paid for billboards and have them defaced... Freedom of speech is for them. People with Atheistic bumper stickers get tickets more regularly, equal protection of the law is for them. If the 2nd amendment were put to a vote and voted down, I would be first in line to buy a gun.

 

[dejapooh]

It would not matter if 75% voted to give them up it would be an illegal vote we are not a democracy, America is a Constitutional Republic, Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

I was willing to take a chance to die in SE Asia to give them freedom and rights, so yes I am ready to die in my back yard to fight for our rights and freedoms here and for my grandkids rights and freedoms...

I agree too.

 

[dejapooh]

Spart, you say "many put zero rational thinking into their post 's " Wow! Just cause you are for taking away the second (at least that is how your posts sound) doesn't mean you should put those with opposing views down....At this point in time the govt. Has taken so much away from us Americans that the only thing we have left is whats left of our rights, why would you want to give those up? I will tell you this, once the govt. Has the guns and us citizens don't the rest of our rights are gone forever. Name one govt. In history that was not power hungry? I bet you can't......

Exactly what have you had taken away?

 

[dejapooh]

Spart, your statement was clearly directed at those who disagree.....I am fine with your opinion, however it is just like my feelings ...just an opinion. I did not say you are wrong about the supreme court. That is why obama is stacking it in his favor. But that being said, if the pass a antigun ruling doesn't make the ruling constitutional but rather political. Shall not be infringed is cut and dry. I don't need some liberal judges telling me, or you if the second is valid. It is and always will be. Period. I think you are missing everyones point.

So you are saying that you are better able to interpret the constitution than judges? That because a group of activist judges make a ruling you disagree with, they are wrong. Funny thing that. Activist judges choose our president a few years ago, While I disagreed with their opinion, I still recognized the President Select as the President. Activist judges have said that corporations are people, thus they should have the right to arm themselves. That would explain the Shell Oil Army (currently deployed in Nigeria). No, sorry. That is NOT how our democracy works. You can try to use the political process to change the law or even the constitution to take the supreme court out of the equation (as was done with the 16th amendment after the Supreme Court repeated ruled that a tax on income was illegal). When you arm yourself and declare that the government is wrong, and to hell with them. Start pulling that trigger and you will see how wrong the government can be.

 

[dejapooh]

I quess people forget the 4th, 'WE THE PEOPLE' That is the problem,to many corrupt judges.

o_0

 

[dejapooh]

Whoa seriously.. Hey buddy let me tell you a stone cold fact.. I live in north central Pa. and anybody that's ever been to this area knows how seriously we take our hunting.. Every year on the first monday after thanksgiving we take to the woods for the opening day of deer season.. How many you ask a million plus.. Guess what none of us take our dangerous guns out to kill anybody or harm anyone.. Most of us are versed in firearm saftey and always treat it with respect.. Guess what the first monday after Thanksgiving I wonder how many crimminals are walking around with firearms looking to do harm to people.. Simple fact my guns ar'nt as you put dangerous.. The people carrying them are ultimatley responsible for the decsions made with them.. So don't go spouting they have no useful purpose.. Because heritage and rights are important to some of us and that's a pretty important purpose in my opinion...

Good point. I should have said useless to me (since I do not hunt). However, no matter how much training you take, accidents happen. Even our vice president shot a man.

I think I should clarify my position.

1) it would be useless to try to add new weapons to the list of weapons that citizens are not allowed to own. Talking about it only makes those who have the inclination to get the weapon go out and actually buy the weapons.

2) We need to have a system in place to try to prevent some people from legally getting guns. Convicted criminals, people suffering from mental disorders, and so on should be prevented from obtaining legal firearms. We can take for granted that if a criminal wants to get a weapon, and legal weapons are not available, then they will get their weapons illegally. I put that in the same camp as those who say that if we make herroin illegal, those who want it will just get it illegally... That's right, and that is how it should be. That does help prevent some people from starting to take, and it adds to the discomfort that builds to hopefully the point where the addict comes to get help...

3) If we are going to have a system in place to check if people are on the list of those who should not have weapons, there should be no legal way around the list. If you go to a gun show, you should be facing a background check. If you are at a pawn shop, Background check. The only place where you will NOT face a background check should be around the back corner at Illegal Al's.

4) We need to streamline the lists and justify them so that you can run a background check anywhere in the country on an Iphone APP. and get results in 10 minutes. Just because we can't do this now does not mean that we should not start to require checks of everyone. Having a goal does not mean you do not start now with what you have. We could not make the moon in 1961, so what was the point of the Mercury project. Putting the system in place now will allow us to learn and improve the system.

5) Personally, I can see requiring a state license in order to BUY a weapon. That to get the license, you need to take safety classes. To keep your license, everyone in the household needs to pass a course specifically for them. My son has taken and passed several weapon safety courses. I don't own a weapon, but I am guessing that since he is a popular kid, one or more of his friends have parents who do. I can also see how having a proactive system would result in a list of those who are likely to have weapons. The revolutionary purpose of the second amendment would prohibit that in my mind. Perhaps we could set up a semi-private company to handle the licensing and make it illegal for them to share their lists with anyone... We have time to work on this...

6) Large Magazines fall directly into the 2nd amendments revolutionary provisions, it seems to me. Then again, we do not allow fully automatic weapons.

7) No weapon currently owned and legally purchased should be taken... Can be taken. We can prohibit the exchange of weapons between private owners. Sure, you have it, but you can not sell it to your neighbor. If he wants one, he should go buy one. Let him face his background check.

 

[dejapooh]

Dejapooh, you are as closed minded as anyone could be....what facts did you have to Support your claims firearms promote violence instead of deter violence? I live in a very rural area and for the police to respond would be about 45 mins. You don't think my guns are quite a deterent? Facts please.

I could ask for facts from you just as easily... Lets leave it as we are products of differing environments. I live where police are available and respond quickly. That clouds my opinions. Your situation clouds yours. One problem is that we need to have laws that cover both situations. If you read my manifesto (if that is what you will call it), I think you will see I am not as closed minded as you think.

 

[bevo]

It's a fact that through out history registration has lead to confiscation which lead to far worse. We all know how to
read. Never happen to the U.S.? Think again.

 

[0121stockpicker]

It's a fact that through out history registration has lead to confiscation which lead to far worse. We all know how to
read. Never happen to the U.S.? Think again.

What are the examples you are talking about? We all the social security numbers, drivers licenses, register our cars, etc, etc, etc. don't remember anything being taken away from me ? And hasn't done firm if gun license been in place for many years? Sounds like most of you still have your guns.

 

[packerbacker]

deja, I'm saying this in all due respect. Your 7 listed points make sense at face value but, none of them would have prevented any of the recent shootings. Then there are those of us who feel that, if the government has a list of where the guns are, when they decide to take them it will be easy to find them. Some of "law enforcements" actions during Katrina were shocking if true. I don't really believe there is a government plot to take away all of our rights but, if they feel a need, they will stop at nothing. It has been suggested that one way to eliminate firearms already in our hands is to not allow them to be passed down to family members, they would have to be turned in upon the death of the present owner. That being the case, I'm making criminals of my grandchildren. The guy that kidnapped the kid and shot the schoolbus driver did it with a handgun, not a assault rifle. So, let's say there weren't anymore AR15's in the world and someone uses a handgun that they stole from someone and comitted a crime. Are we NOW at the point of gathering ALL guns? There are some in our government that would love that as long as their bodyguards could have theirs.