Kent2406 Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 Just because I know how much some love new threads pertaining to guns.Out of the 2,513,171 deaths in 2011, only 32,163 involved a firearm. 19,766 of those were self inflicted.http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swingset Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 Just because I know how much some love new threads pertaining to guns.Out of the 2,513,171 deaths in 2011, only 32,163 involved a firearm. 19,766 of those were self inflicted.http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdfAnd the bulk of the remaining gun deaths were gun/drug related.Factor all that bullshit out, and unless you're dealing in the ghetto gun crime in this nation is on par with most of Europe....where the liberals assure us hugs and fairies dwell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitani Posted December 19, 2012 Report Share Posted December 19, 2012 Just because I know how much some love new threads pertaining to guns.Out of the 2,513,171 deaths in 2011, only 32,163 involved a firearm. 19,766 of those were self inflicted.http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdfIntradesting. Very intradesting.Definitely something to pull out with the anti-gun folk! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 How dare you publish facts and logic.....how dare you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brownsfan1 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Thats interesting info I'm sure that this will get overlooked by the anti-gun folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Overlooked? Nah... If gun deaths are so few and far between, why do you need one? (unless you're a ghetto drug dealer trying to protect your stash?) Furthermore why would you need a gun designed to kill lots and lots of people very quickly? (as opposed to a 2 or 6 shot gun) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggO Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I'd like to see this compared to death related to car accidents and drunk driving Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brownsfan1 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Overlooked? Nah... If gun deaths are so few and far between, why do you need one? (unless you're a ghetto drug dealer trying to protect your stash?) Furthermore why would you need a gun designed to kill lots and lots of people very quickly? (as opposed to a 2 or 6 shot gun) I'm not a ghetto drug dealer, but I do like to protect my property and myself from the ghetto criminals. As for the gun that is designed to "kill lots and lots of people" it is a fun hobby for me to go to the range and relieve stress much like riding, hence multiple bikes. The numbers don't lie the criminals have no respect for life,a legal gun owner does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I'm not a ghetto drug dealer, but I do like to protect my property and myself from the ghetto criminals. As for the gun that is designed to "kill lots and lots of people" it is a fun hobby for me to go to the range and relieve stress much like riding, hence multiple bikes. The numbers don't lie the criminals have no respect for life,a legal gun owner does.Okay, where do criminals get guns? they can't legally buy them from the store.. right?They steal them from "legal" gun owners who can't lock them up properly, OR from "legal" gun owners selling them at gun shows... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brownsfan1 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Okay, where do criminals get guns? they can't legally buy them from the store.. right?They steal them from "legal" gun owners who can't lock them up properly, OR from "legal" gun owners selling them at gun shows... True there are loop holes. I like to think that most of the legal gun owners are responsible and lock them in a safe. With that being said as a gun owner my safe is locked and my carry weapon is on me. I'm not saying that it is full proof, but banning guns is not the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 True there are loop holes. I like to think that most of the legal gun owners are responsible and lock them in a safe. With that being said as a gun owner my safe is locked and my carry weapon is on me. I'm not saying that it is full proof, but banning guns is not the answer.I wouldn't support an all out ban on guns either, but some weapons just aren't for civilian use. I think most people agree with that particular sentiment, we just all draw the lines in different places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjachic Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Overlooked? Nah... If gun deaths are so few and far between, why do you need one? (unless you're a ghetto drug dealer trying to protect your stash?) Furthermore why would you need a gun designed to kill lots and lots of people very quickly? (as opposed to a 2 or 6 shot gun)simple - they are fun to shoot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brownsfan1 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I wouldn't support an all out ban on guns either, but some weapons just aren't for civilian use. I think most people agree with that particular sentiment, we just all draw the lines in different places. I agree that we draw the lines in different places because I feel that if I want to buy an assault rifle its my right to. I'm agreeing to disagree because I try to hear the other sides opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedytriple Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Some bikes are to fast for anything but a race track under a professionals use. Why not ban those while we're at it. Why should cars be able to drive faster then the freeway speed limit maybe we should pass a law that restricts cars top speeds to 70mph? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 simple - they are fun to shoot!there are plenty of things that are fun, that we agree as a society require special training, licensing, and status to do. I imagine piloting a fighter jet is fun, but just because it's fun doesn't mean you automatically have a right to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Some bikes are to fast for anything but a race track under a professionals use. Why not ban those while we're at it. Why should cars be able to drive faster then the freeway speed limit maybe we should pass a law that restricts cars top speeds to 70mph?I'm certain that will happen eventually, and our kids, grandkids, nieces and nephews will be safer for it. times change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coyote Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I imagine piloting a fighter jet is fun, but just because it's fun doesn't mean you automatically have a right to do it.Citation please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjachic Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Ok then in that case, why dont we ban anything that can be used to create a bomb! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Ok then in that case, why dont we ban anything that can be used to create a bomb!because most of those things have legitimate practical uses...what do you use an assault rifle for? trimming trees? planting corn? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjachic Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 My point is, there are other way to kill people other than just guns. So how does banning guns solve the problem, when I can turn around and use a bomb or gas instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 My point is, there are other way to kill people other than just guns. So how does banning guns solve the problem, when I can turn around and use a bomb or gas instead.Will it make every murder go away? absolutely not... will it make tragedies like this occur less often? yes... Would it have made this one less deadly? probably.responsible gun owners obey the laws, and if the law says no assault weapons old psycho's mom probably wouldn't have had one, and old psycho probably wouldn't have had alternative access to one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjachic Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 No I really dont think at all that it will make tragedies occur less often at all or make any of them less deadly. How can you say that? If he used a bomb, instead of a gun, it probably wouldve been a lot worse! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent2406 Posted December 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Overlooked? Nah... If gun deaths are so few and far between, why do you need one? (unless you're a ghetto drug dealer trying to protect your stash?) Furthermore why would you need a gun designed to kill lots and lots of people very quickly? (as opposed to a 2 or 6 shot gun)Here you go, please watch. I posted this in another thread. At the end is a very good axample as to why we should have the right to have 1, or 10, 20, or however many I wish to own. Is it common for riots or life threatening situations to accur that would require one or many? Nope. Is it it possible? You damn right it's possible. I hope you never find yourself in that situation, but what are you going to do if you do? Talk your way out of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjachic Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 A LITTLE GUN HISTORYIn 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminatedIn 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total... of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'.During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! If you value your freedom, please spread this antigun-control message to all of your friends. SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE. SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!! IT'S A NO BRAINER!DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET. Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!It's time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us.You're not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to disarm the people~ Conservatives ClubSee More Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! I think the reason japan didn't invade america was A. their surprise attack intended to cripple our navy failed, and B. our nuclear capability demonstrated on hiroshima and nagasaki.it had nothing to do with your guns, it was the United States military that they feared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.