Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Yeah I wish I could be in the good ol Michigan Militia, but I don't want to be put on the FBI watch list.

At 3/9/04 05:30 PM, 70TA wrote: Yeah I wish I could be in the good ol Michigan Militia, but I don't want to be put on the FBI watch list.

What on earth would you be doing in order to be afraid of being on the FBI watch list? </sweetnessandlightvoice> Oh yer, I forgot, you could be arrested and held without trial or reason for an unlimited amount of time now. *Smacls self on head* Silly me...

At 3/9/04 05:30 PM, 70TA wrote: Yeah I wish I could be in the good ol Michigan Militia, but I don't want to be put on the FBI watch list.

Given your unwavering support of the GOP, I'm sure the FBI won't come knocking at your door. Then again, they are pretty bad at picking and shoosing their battles, as the past has shown.

At 3/9/04 05:18 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 3/9/04 01:17 PM, -gOOie- wrote: Is it hypocritical to be against guns but play paintball and enjoy it? What about FPS (First Person Shooters)?

No. FPS don't hurt anyone. Painball is consentual and safe (the majority of the time)

Tell that to the soccer moms at my school......

At 3/10/04 10:51 PM, MKII wrote:

At 3/9/04 05:18 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 3/9/04 01:17 PM, -gOOie- wrote: Is it hypocritical to be against guns but play paintball and enjoy it? What about FPS (First Person Shooters)?

No. FPS don't hurt anyone. Painball is consentual and safe (the majority of the time)

Tell that to the soccer moms at my school......

Do they drive SUV (aka Suburban Tanks) and have short hair?

Honestly, I love paintball but I am against guns. I know it's weird, but it's true for me. It's just a fun sport and (like any that are played correctly), injuryless.

shooting is also a fun sport, but like every other sport, there is a potential for accidents and injuries.

And, with perfect timing...

You couldn't make it up, could you? And it wouln't have happened if it wasn't for that Precious Second Ammendment - the thing that's about 300 years out of date, apparently.

That's the thing about written constitutions, they're good for the time they were drawn up, but a couple of centuries later, following them to the letter is a tad unrealistic, outmoded, and indicative of a lack of moral progress.

At 3/12/04 08:09 AM, D2KVirus wrote: You couldn't make it up, could you? And it wouln't have happened if it wasn't for that Precious Second Ammendment - the thing that's about 300 years out of date, apparently.

Just shows you how dasngerous those things are. And you're right. You cou'nd't make it up.

At 3/12/04 08:09 AM, D2KVirus wrote: And, with perfect timing...

You couldn't make it up, could you? And it wouln't have happened if it wasn't for that Precious Second Ammendment - the thing that's about 300 years out of date, apparently.

That's the thing about written constitutions, they're good for the time they were drawn up, but a couple of centuries later, following them to the letter is a tad unrealistic, outmoded, and indicative of a lack of moral progress.

that's really patriotic of you, isn't it?

i fail to see what the Mason's accident has anything to do with how guns are dangerous.not only were the people handling the gun incompetent (unlike most gun owners), but i am pretty sure that they would have used some other dangerous object in their 'ceremony'. an accident with a firearm is the same as an accident with a pickaxe or bucher knife.

The constitution is not an outmodeled piece of parchment, as many of you seem to think. the founding fathers drafted it with enough forsight to allow it to remain flexable as time passed on.

out of all the countried in the world, America stands out as having not only wonderful freedoms but a stable government, probably the only one on the world that has not suffered a revolution or coup de ta (i seriously suspect Bush, but, unfortunatly, there is no clear evidence.) We owe all of this to our Contitution.

If we were to re-write the constitution, what would happed? who could we really trust to handle the task fairly? no one alive in this world now, when given so much power, would be able to resist changing things so that his views or will dominated everyone elses. Power corrups, and absolute power corrups absolutely.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" - Ben Franklin

You doubt the freedom to bear arms, obviously. we all know the bad things that happen when criminals get a hold of guns, but guns are merely a tool. A murder with a gun is no different than a murder with an knife or car. Do you blame the knofe for the cut on your hand, or is it
your own fault that you were cut?

guns are used over two million times per year to prevent crime from taking place. in 90% of the sutuation, all the gun owner had to do was to flash his weapon and the mugger took off running. no violence involved at all. but when shooting do take place, civilans are able to shoot more violent criminals that the police, because a gun will be there to defend you, while the cops will take 8-20 minutes to arrive, during which you could have dead.

I find it interesting to note that dictators like adolf hitler had an extreme fear of non-nazis owning weapons. in Germany, before the holocaust, all guns owned by german citizens were registered and then confiscated. in every country he invaded, Hitler removed the weapons of the conquered peoples.

after all, "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
- Patrick Henry

"No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
- Thomas Jefferson

Every one should know that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun
-Mao Tse Tung

"Ideas are more dangerous than guns. We do not allow our people to have ideas. Why should we allow them to have guns?"
-Joseph Stalin

While knocking out great powers like france, britin, and russia, hitler avioded confronting one small nation with no army: switzerlan, for he knew not only that switezerland had no army, but that it was an army. a country with an universal militia, the swiss people could easily lauch a guerrilla war against the nazis, something harder to stamp out than four field armies.

The mighty japanies war machine, undoubtedly one of the fiercest, most fanatical fighting force in history, killed more than five millon asians in some of the most save ways possible. this rutless, bloodthirsty army was mroe than capable of taking over alaska and rampaging through N. America, but held back. one reason for thair hesitation was the knowlege of the Second amendment, the knowlege that the americans could launch a guerrilla war easily against the japanese invaders. the Japanese, already taking a beating from the Communist guerrillas in china were not willing to take the risk of loosing men and materials in such a situaion.

the liberals, would of course argue that gun control reduces crime, since guns mysteriouly induce into people the desire to kill and behave violently. well let me just say theis: there is not one significant instance in whick gun control has reduced crime rates a significant amount. in london, for excample, the crime rate has risen to higher than that of new york's, something that took place after a nation wide gun ban took place.

as thomas jefferson so eloquently put it, "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined
nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
-Thomas Jefferson, "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776

Studies have shown that crime rates in states fell sharply after concealed carrying of firearms was allowed, scaring the criminals enough so that they knew their next victem might give up his posessions bullets first.

So, does gun confiscation solve any problams? i seems to open a whole new can of worms

ps: to bum cheekycity, stop talking about what you obviously know nothing about. your know nothing of this freedom, so you should keep you mouth shut about what you have no knowlege about. we consult engineers for briges, tachers for educational programs, mechanics for cars, and people who know about guns for gun related issues.

pps; where did red skunk go? it's kinda boring wothout him

excuse me for spelling and id i excluded anything important, i have a headache and typing quickly

At 3/12/04 06:44 PM, MKII wrote:
that's really patriotic of you, isn't it?

Lose ten points for not looking for basic facts, and 20 for bringing in the Patriotism angle.

i fail to see what the Mason's accident has anything to do with how guns are dangerous.not only were the people handling the gun incompetent (unlike most gun owners), but i am pretty sure that they would have used some other dangerous object in their 'ceremony'. an accident with a firearm is the same as an accident with a pickaxe or bucher knife.

Yes, as they were going to stab him with a plastic knife in order to see if he could hack it...

By the way, do you own:
1.) A gun.
2.) Many guns.
3.) Not old enough, but I want to own a gun.
4.) Not old enough, but I want to own many guns.
5.) Think guns look all "manly."

The constitution is not an outmodeled piece of parchment, as many of you seem to think. the founding fathers drafted it with enough forsight to allow it to remain flexable as time passed on.

And when did the Founding Fathers draft it? If it ewasn't last week, it has no bearing on what's happening today - SIMPLE!!!

out of all the countried in the world, America stands out as having not only wonderful freedoms but a stable government, probably the only one on the world that has not suffered a revolution or coup de ta (i seriously suspect Bush, but, unfortunatly, there is no clear evidence.) We owe all of this to our Contitution.

Freedoms? God, another 20 points off for bringing that one in without a hint of irony. As for a stable Government, I doubt it - no-one has a stable Government, just varying levels of unstable. As for a lack of Coup d'Etat - what was the Civil War?

If we were to re-write the constitution, what would happed? who could we really trust to handle the task fairly? no one alive in this world now, when given so much power, would be able to resist changing things so that his views or will dominated everyone elses. Power corrups, and absolute power corrups absolutely.

Who could you trust to write it in the 18th Century? Why are they immune from criticism for writinhg it, yet modern people aren't Besides, the Constitution did not contain anything about ownership of guns - it was thrown in at a later date. So, was that person trustworthy to meddle with the Constitution, and how?

You've invalidated that argument.

You doubt the freedom to bear arms, obviously. we all know the bad things that happen when criminals get a hold of guns, but guns are merely a tool...

How many incidents of gun deaths are there when it isn't criminals doing the shooting? That makes it a manslaughter with a gun, which you cannot do with a knife without a seriously good lawyer.

Mudewr with a knife MUST involve malice of forethought, as you have to walk right up to them, and stabe them repeatedly to kill them. You can discharge a gun by accident, or not mean to harm anybody, and it still kills. There are cases of people firing their gun in the air, and the bullet raining down and killing someone many miles away, or bouncing off a concrete ceiling - can you do that with a knife? No.

guns are used over two million times per year to prevent crime from taking place. in 90% of the sutuation, all the gun owner had to do was to flash his weapon and the mugger took off running...

And another 20 points are removed.

So, it's fine to shoot someone if you think it's a mugger? This is how most shotings in the home are friends or family, because of the attitude of "shoot first, ask questions later." And what if you flash the weapon, and they don't run, but pull out a gun of their own, or have an accomplice who also has a gun - shoot one, the other will shoot you.

I find it interesting to note that dictators like adolf hitler had an extreme fear of non-nazis owning weapons. in Germany, before the holocaust, all guns owned by german citizens were registered and then confiscated. in every country he invaded, Hitler removed the weapons of the conquered peoples.

100 points off.

So, we're Fascists for wanting less guns and, as a result, less deaths? By the way, how many times do you think I've heard the exact same kneejerk response?

While knocking out great powers like france, britin, and russia, hitler avioded confronting one small nation with no army: switzerlan...

No, in Switzerland everyone HAS to do National Service. Also, it's a bugger to invade due to these things called The Alps getting in the way.

And the Germans DIDN'T conquor Britian - they were fended off by our army, navy and air force. Nor did they with the Russians, who drove them out with THEIR army. How fucking stupid are you, when you have to dredge up quotes between the bullshit?

The mighty japanies war machine, undoubtedly one of the fiercest, most fanatical fighting force in history, killed more than five millon asians in some of the most save ways possible. this rutless, bloodthirsty army was mroe than capable of taking over alaska and rampaging through N. America, but held back. one reason for thair hesitation was the knowlege of the Second amendment...

That would require A NAVY as there is WATER in the way, an awful lot of WATER. You'd spot that coming before they reached Hawaii.

the liberals, would of course argue that gun control reduces crime, since guns mysteriouly induce into people the desire to kill and behave violently. well let me just say theis: there is not one significant instance in whick gun control has reduced crime rates a significant amount. in london, for excample, the crime rate has risen to higher than that of new york's, something that took place after a nation wide gun ban took place.

And people like you will insult my intelligence, waste my time, and prove how fucking stupid pro-gun people are.

Studies have shown that crime rates in states fell sharply after concealed carrying of firearms was allowed, scaring the criminals enough so that they knew their next victem might give up his posessions bullets first.

Studies also show that American states without the Death Penalty have far less crime, and isn't THAT supposed to be a deterrant?

So, does gun confiscation solve any problams? i seems to open a whole new can of worms

Yes - you. Don't mind being referred to as a worm, do you? Ah, who cares what you think?

I don't see how anyone should have a 'right' of 'ownership' to anything that's singular purpose is the termination of life.

And that goes for nukes too.

At 3/12/04 06:44 PM, MKII wrote: that's really patriotic of you, isn't it?

Why should D2K (or anyone for that matter) need to love their country? Side note: both me and him are from the UK, so we aren't being really unpatriotic when we talk about the US.

The constitution is not an outmodeled piece of parchment, as many of you seem to think. the founding fathers drafted it with enough forsight to allow it to remain flexable as time passed on.

Well, it isn't now is it? The founding fathers didn't account for what might happen in 50 years, or 100 or 200. ALL constitutions need ammendments, and changes. Nothing is perfect.

out of all the countried in the world, America stands out as having not only wonderful freedoms but a stable government,

It took me 4 minuites to stop myself laughing here. What freedoms do you have that we dont have here in the UK? Or in France, or in the Netherlands, besides the right to carry a dangerous gun in public?

Power corrups, and absolute power corrups absolutely.

Power doesn't corrupt, people with power are just able to get their views across easier.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" - Ben Franklin

Democracy is twelve lambs and two wolves voting on what to have for lunch, and the wolves agreeing.

You doubt the freedom to bear arms, obviously. we all know the bad things that happen when criminals get a hold of guns, but guns are merely a tool. A murder with a gun is no different than a murder with an knife or car. Do you blame the knofe for the cut on your hand, or is it
your own fault that you were cut?

It would be my own fault, but if I wasn't carrying the knife, it wouldn't have happened. It was depoendant on two things: me and the knife. If EITHER one was removed, the cut would not have happened.

"No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
- Thomas Jefferson

If you're worried about tyranny in goernment, vote Green.

Every one should know that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun
-Mao Tse Tung

That's more an anti-gun statement to me...

"Ideas are more dangerous than guns. We do not allow our people to have ideas. Why should we allow them to have guns?"
-Joseph Stalin

When was the last time you shot someone with an idea? Or saw the headline: "Vicious gang kill elderly gent by thiknking for a bit"?

the liberals, would of course argue that gun control reduces crime, since guns mysteriouly induce into people the desire to kill and behave violently. well let me just say theis: there is not one significant instance in whick gun control has reduced crime rates a significant amount. in london, for excample, the crime rate has risen to higher than that of new york's, something that took place after a nation wide gun ban took place.

In the UK, we have gun control, and 68 Gun deaths in 200/2001 (I forget which.
In the US, you don't have gun control, and >11,000 Gun Deaths in the same year.

So maybe guns aren't the cause of crime, but they definately seem to contribute to it...

Studies have shown that crime rates in states fell sharply after concealed carrying of firearms was allowed, scaring the criminals enough so that they knew their next victem might give up his posessions bullets first.

If I was a criminal, and I thought someone might have a gun, and I was going to mug him, i'd kill him before even saying a word.

ps: to bum cheekycity, stop talking about what you obviously know nothing about. your know nothing of this freedom, so you should keep you mouth shut about what you have no knowlege about. we consult engineers for briges, tachers for educational programs, mechanics for cars, and people who know about guns for gun related issues.

Only gun owners can talk about guns now? Thank God. It was worrying about haveing all those white people talk about race issues, and those straight people debate gay merriage. If you can't tell, that would be sarcasm...

pps; where did red skunk go? it's kinda boring wothout him

He's left for a bit.

At 3/12/04 06:44 PM, MKII wrote: "No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
- Thomas Jefferson

The only way to protect yourself from any form of tyrany within government is to halt production. Far more effective than civil war. A government cannot exist without the taxes of it's people. Without the taxes of the people it would be unable to pay the 'enforcers' such as the police and military that protect it from falling from power.

At 3/13/04 10:23 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: Only gun owners can talk about guns now? Thank God. It was worrying about haveing all those white people talk about race issues, and those straight people debate gay merriage. If you can't tell, that would be sarcasm...

Pure genius!!!

Democracy is twelve lambs and two wolves voting on what to have for lunch, and the wolves agreeing.

*wild hysterical laughter *

It took me 4 minuites to stop myself laughing here. What freedoms do you have that we dont have here in the UK? Or in France, or in the Netherlands, besides the right to carry a dangerous gun in public?

Guns ae only dangerous in the wrong hands. I think we can all agree on that.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" - Ben Franklin

Democracy is twelve lambs and two wolves voting on what to have for lunch, and the wolves agreeing.

why sould they woves agree? how could the lambs make them agree?

Every one should know that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun
-Mao Tse Tung

That's more an anti-gun statement to me...

if the people did not have political power, where would we be?

"Ideas are more dangerous than guns. We do not allow our people to have ideas. Why should we allow them to have guns?"
-Joseph Stalin

When was the last time you shot someone with an idea? Or saw the headline: "Vicious gang kill elderly gent by thiknking for a bit"?

nazism and communism were ideas, weren't they?
the naziz killed over three million people

Stalin killed probably more.

the liberals, would of course argue that gun control reduces crime, since guns mysteriouly induce into people the desire to kill and behave violently. well let me just say theis: there is not one significant instance in whick gun control has reduced crime rates a significant amount. in london, for excample, the crime rate has risen to higher than that of new york's, something that took place after a nation wide gun ban took place.

In the UK, we have gun control, and 68 Gun deaths in 200/2001 (I forget which.
In the US, you don't have gun control, and >11,000 Gun Deaths in the same year.

the us hase more gun owners, so maybe a ratio would be more apropriate?

Studies have shown that crime rates in states fell sharply after concealed carrying of firearms was allowed, scaring the criminals enough so that they knew their next victem might give up his posessions bullets first.

If I was a criminal, and I thought someone might have a gun, and I was going to mug him, i'd kill him before even saying a word.

most criminals are cowards. police studies seem to confirm this.

in south africa, there was a news story about this church that was attacked by three terrorists with assault rifles. a chirch memeber, wiht a amall five ahot revolver, shot at them, wounding one or two, and then the terrorists retreated.

ps: to bum cheekycity, stop talking about what you obviously know nothing about. your know nothing of this freedom, so you should keep you mouth shut about what you have no knowlege about. we consult engineers for briges, tachers for educational programs, mechanics for cars, and people who know about guns for gun related issues.

Only gun owners can talk about guns now? Thank God. It was worrying about haveing all those white people talk about race issues, and those straight people debate gay merriage. If you can't tell, that would be sarcasm...

racial issues concern eveyrbody, as do gay marrage and income tax.

think about it..... if we had ignorant, unqualified people designing buildings (like in China, New Jersy) would that be a good idea? People who know about guns, not only gun owners, should construct gun laws.
on a note, the avarage american gn owner is not some Rambo nut, he's just an ordinary person. i have two teacers at my school who own several weapons and they are some of the nices, most politet people you will ever meet.

just thought of something: does your statistic of >11,000 gun deaths in america per year include the number of criminals shot while commiting robbery, holdups, rape, and so on?

At 3/13/04 04:02 PM, MKII wrote: Guns ae only dangerous in the wrong hands. I think we can all agree on that.

The wrong hands are any hands which are capavble of pulling the trigger and sending a small bit of metal flying through someone's head.

why sould they woves agree? how could the lambs make them agree?

God only knows, but that is democracy. By definition, in a democratic society, the wolves would agree.

if the people did not have political power, where would we be?

America?

nazism and communism were ideas, weren't they?
the naziz killed over three million people

The poison gas killed them, not the idea. Just because someone wants to do something, doesn't mean it's going to happen.

the us hase more gun owners, so maybe a ratio would be more apropriate?

Well, it's ~34 times more, accounting for population. Notice i'm not accounting for the fact that the US has more gu owners, because I believe that to be the main cause/most substantial contribting factor to gun crime.

racial issues concern eveyrbody, as do gay marrage and income tax.

How does gay marriage concern a straight person? What is it to a straight person if gays are or aren't allowed to marry?

think about it..... if we had ignorant, unqualified people designing buildings (like in China, New Jersy) would that be a good idea? People who know about guns, not only gun owners, should construct gun laws.

What more is there to know about guns that would help you construct a gun law?

BCC, let me ask you something. How easy do you think it would be for you to go out and get a gun off of a black market sales man out there in england?

here, the ease at which illegal firearms are obtained renders most gun laws redundant, i.e. they are only stopping people who wouldn't commit a crime in the first place from obtaining a weapon.
it doesn't matter if there are gun restrictions are not. for people to go out and buy a weapon, if they really want to, obtaining the weapon is not so inconvenient as to dissuade someone who genuinely feels the need to own a weapon. but an outright illegalization of guns would only disarm the non criminal populace, and i really don't see the sense in that.

of course, i'm not a 14 year old britboy with a highly superior i.q., so maybe you can help clear this one up for me and explain why the gun laws in my country should be changed based on the gun laws in your country.

At 3/13/04 06:06 PM, Izuamoto wrote: BCC, let me ask you something. How easy do you think it would be for you to go out and get a gun off of a black market sales man out there in england?

It;s not something that i've given seriouis consideration to. Pretty fucking hard, considering the fact that I dont have the slightest clue where to start looking.

of course, i'm not a 14 year old britboy with a highly superior i.q., so maybe you can help clear this one up for me and explain why the gun laws in my country should be changed based on the gun laws in your country.

I'm going on what I KNOW here, not what i've read off a site. I KNOW that i've never seen a gun before in my life. Ever. Do you know how safe that makes me feel? Very. I dont have a gun, they don't have a gun. I feel safe.

I'm pretty sure none of my friends have ever seen a gun, and i'm actually going to go into school on Moinday, and ask people if they've actually seen a real gun (not in a movie etc.) I'm pretty certain i'm guna get a lot of 'no's.

I'm making the obvious conclusion that my country has very few guns. From what i've heard on the BBS, and read on other sites, I am drawing the conclusion that the US has LOADS of guns, in comparision. I am also jumping to the conclusion that the US has loads more gun deaths than the UK, because i've never heard anyone say the opposite.

From this, i'm making a link that the avaliability of guns has something to do with the amount of people killed by guns each year.

At 3/13/04 04:08 PM, MKII wrote: just thought of something: does your statistic of >11,000 gun deaths in america per year include the number of criminals shot while commiting robbery, holdups, rape, and so on?

10,801 homicides, I don't believe that that number includes justifiable shootings in self-defense. But, in '99, there were only "...154 justifiable homicides by private citizens."

It's not changing the number significantly either way...

source: Brady Campaign Firearm Facts
(Their number came from - Crime in the United States, 1999. Washington DC. Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2000.)

At 3/13/04 06:22 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 3/13/04 06:06 PM, Izuamoto wrote:

I'm pretty certain i'm guna get a lot of 'no's.

Ahh. There's so many witty remarks I could insert here. Oh well - from my own personal experience, practically everyone at my high school had seen, held, and usually shot something before. There were several kids whose parents had large gun caches with fully-automatic weapons, etc..

The big joke with one kid was hunting deer with one...

I'm making the obvious conclusion that my country has very few guns. From what i've heard on the BBS, and read on other sites, I am drawing the conclusion that the US has LOADS of guns, in comparision.

"40-43% percent of households own guns. This means that an approximately 44 million Americans own an estimated 192 million firearms."
There are approximately 192 million privately owned firearms in the U.S. - 65 million of which are handguns.
Brady Campaign - 'Risks of a Gun in the Home'
(They got it from - Police Foundation, Guns in America: Results of a comprehensive national survey on firearms ownership and use, 1996)

I am also jumping to the conclusion that the US has loads more gun deaths than the UK, because i've never heard anyone say the opposite.

Not really jumping to the conclusion, i think everyone here knows the difference. And for every fatal shooting, there are two non-fatal firearm injuries in the US. So... That's another 20,000 people being injured every year.
Brady Campaign - 'Firearm Facts'
(Their source - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Nonfatal and fatal firearm-related injuries - United States, 1993-1997. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1999;48:1029-1034.)

From this, i'm making a link that the avaliability of guns has something to do with the amount of people killed by guns each year.

Oh, for shits and giggles, let me put this one out. Hate the whole Brady Campaign all you like, but they provide sources for everything on their site. You can backtrack it if you want -
"When someone is home, a gun is used for protection in fewer than two percent of home invasion crimes."
Brady Campaign - 'Risks of a Gun in the Home'
(Their source - Kellermann AL., Journal of the American Medical Association, 1995.)

The wrong hands are any hands which are capavble of pulling the trigger and sending a small bit of metal flying through someone's head.

the police and military have the wrong hands

why sould they woves agree? how could the lambs make them agree?

God only knows, but that is democracy. By definition, in a democratic society, the wolves would agree.

. the wolves (politicians) are kept in line by force, they know it is impossible to sieze control of the government and that they will suffer swift retribution if they do so and behave themselves. before hitler, Germany was a democracy, but he managed to shance that withing a few years, didn't he?

if the people did not have political power, where would we be?

America?

not yet. bush will be outta here before 1005 hopefully, although the thought having jon kerry as a president makes me want to puke.

nazism and communism were ideas, weren't they?
the naziz killed over three million people

\would there have been gas shambers if hitler had not brainwashed germany with his Aryan Race theory?

the us hase more gun owners, so maybe a ratio would be more apropriate?

Well, it's ~34 times more, accounting for population. Notice i'm not accounting for the fact that the US has more gun owners, because I believe that to be the main cause/most substantial contribting factor to gun crime.

guun owners the main cause of crime? legal gun owners are one of the most law abiding groups in america. crimials owning guns are another issue.

racial issues concern eveyrbody, as do gay marrage and income tax.

How does gay marriage concern a straight person? What is it to a straight person if gays are or aren't allowed to marry?

bush obviously thinks otherwise. personally, i don't care.

gay people making their own decisions about marrage.... well, as most politicians are gay... this is a non issue.

think about it..... if we had ignorant, unqualified people designing buildings (like in China, New Jersy) would that be a good idea? People who know about guns, not only gun owners, should construct gun laws.

What more is there to know about guns that would help you construct a gun law?

know how it works, know why th\ey are used, know for what purposes they are used, legal and illigal, know how much and how many..... thgere is more to this issue than meets the eye (as with anyting else.

At 3/9/04 05:30 PM, 70TA wrote: Yeah I wish I could be in the good ol Michigan Militia, but I don't want to be put on the FBI watch list.

I find this ironic that most militias are anti government, as well as usually racists, and anti authoritarian. Much like punks, without the racism.

As for the guns, well, it's a individual's choice. You can no more take away the right that exists than take away free speech.

At 3/13/04 08:11 PM, Red_Skvnk wrote:

At 3/13/04 04:08 PM, MKII wrote: just thought of something: does your statistic of >11,000 gun deaths in america per year include the number of criminals shot while commiting robbery, holdups, rape, and so on?

10,801 homicides, I don't believe that that number includes justifiable shootings in self-defense. But, in '99, there were only "...154 justifiable homicides by private citizens."

It's not changing the number significantly either way...

source: Brady Campaign Firearm Facts

does bradly tell you how many suicides with guns? i heard that suicide accounts for a lot of 'gun deaths'.

i also read that in the 60's some politician took the total number of police shootings, shooting doen by private citizens, suicides, accidnets, ans well as intentional homicides, into a gigantoc >30,000 figure and used it to scare congress.

(Their number came from - Crime in the United States, 1999. Washington DC. Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2000.)

Ahh. There's so many witty remarks I could insert here. Oh well - from my own personal experience, practically everyone at my high school had seen, held, and usually shot something before. There were several kids whose parents had large gun caches with fully-automatic weapons, etc..

The big joke with one kid was hunting deer with one...

no school shootings at your school, i hope?

Not really jumping to the conclusion, i think everyone here knows the difference. And for every fatal shooting, there are two non-fatal firearm injuries in the US. So... That's another 20,000 people being injured every year.

we really need to teach people how to ahndle those weapons properly.

From this, i'm making a link that the avaliability of guns has something to do with the amount of people killed by guns each year.

Oh, for shits and giggles, let me put this one out. Hate the whole Brady Campaign all you like, but they provide sources for everything on their site. You can backtrack it if you want -
"When someone is home, a gun is used for protection in fewer than two percent of home invasion crimes."

kinda like the Gun Owners of America site

do you think it is wrong to use a gun when some dope smoking punk breaks into you house with a buch of his buddies armed with several knives?

guns are used in less that two percent of cases..... were the gun owners at home or were they bowling? of the burglers struck when the homeowners were away, then of course guns weren't used.

At 3/13/04 08:11 PM, Red_Skvnk wrote:

At 3/13/04 04:08 PM, MKII wrote: just thought of something: does your statistic of >11,000 gun deaths in america per year include the number of criminals shot while commiting robbery, holdups, rape, and so on?

10,801 homicides, I don't believe that that number includes justifiable shootings in self-defense. But, in '99, there were only "...154 justifiable homicides by private citizens."

It's not changing the number significantly either way...

Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).6 And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."

source:

Gun Owners of America

At 3/13/04 08:51 PM, MKII wrote: does bradly tell you how many suicides with guns? i heard that suicide accounts for a lot of 'gun deaths'.

Yes -

"In 1998, 30,708 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths - 12,102 (39%) of those were murdered; 17,424 (57%) were suicides; 866 (3%) were accidents; and in 316 (1%) the intent was unknown."
Their source - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. Unpublished Data from the National Vital Statistics System, 2000.

i also read that in the 60's some politician took the total number of police shootings, shooting doen by private citizens, suicides, accidnets, ans well as intentional homicides, into a gigantoc >30,000 figure and used it to scare congress.

Yeah, it's a pretty large number.

At 3/13/04 09:05 PM, MKII wrote: Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).

Well, I don't know where exactly their source got the number of 1,527 (or what he considers as a 'criminal'), but the 1999 FBI report on crime in the US cited only 154 justified homicides (ie. in self-defense)

At 3/13/04 11:41 PM, Red_Skvnk wrote:

At 3/13/04 09:05 PM, MKII wrote: Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).

Well, I don't know where exactly their source got the number of 1,527 (or what he considers as a 'criminal'), but the 1999 FBI report on crime in the US cited only 154 justified homicides (ie. in self-defense)

shooting someone doesn't necessarily mean killing him. it's kinda hard to die from a bullet would to the shoulder, leg, hand, etc, so there could be a large number of justifiable, non-leathal shootings.