Why can't people see the difference between a handgun and, say, a swimming pool?

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: wwswimming

I think my sarcasm meter just exploded, or are you serious? Yes in most states you can shoot someone who enters your house without your consent.

what if it's a cop ?

If it's a cop who has identified himself and has a good reason to come in without consent because they have a warrant, then no. In all other cases, yes. This isn't rocket science...

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
I'm not really a pro-gun control type, but you pro-gun people really do say stupid things when it comes to debating the issue.

Funny, those of who defend our 2nd amendment rights think the same of gun-grabbers.

So, you've never heard a pro-gun argument and though, "dear god that was stupid. Sure I like my guns but that particular statement was plain stupid."

Or do you think anybody who disagrees with your position is stupid?

Not everybody. There are people with well-reasoned arguments against guns. None of them visit this forum.

Elaborate.

 

[Deudalus]

Originally posted by: marincounty
The government takes your money to provide for defense, medicare and servicing the debt, all of which are constitutional.

Tapping phones and reading your email are not legal. There's a difference.

Pretending they're the same is one of the reasons most people think libertarians are wackos.

Actually, if you do some research you will find that:

1: The government specifically grants every citizen the right to bear arms for personal defense AND for defense from the government.

Bear in mind that it was an oppressive government that we had just freed ourselves from. Our founding fathers believed that by people having more power and more ways to defend itself from oppression the better off we would all be because that puts even more restraint on the government.

Have you not noticed that so much of the Constitution and Bill of Rights is wordage to either give power to the states or to the people and take power away from the federal government?

This is why I, as well as so many others, have a deep distrust for liberals (and neo-cons who are no better) because every expansion of the government is an infringement on the basic founding ideas of the Constitution.

So don't talk out of both sides of your mouth saying that "GW Bush is ripping up our rights and the Constitution" and at the same time say "the federal government ought to pass a law that, or make a law that, or found a program that, or ban this thing or that thing" because that makes you a hypocrite.

2: Nowhere will you find in any document the right for the government to tax your income.

Thus, just like swimming pools the income tax would be easier gotten rid of than guns as well.

 

[m1ldslide1]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
The largest problem imo concerning guns is how the manufacturing and distribution procedures are regulated. I really don't have any issues with people owning guns for home defense, hunting, or just to have some fun at a shooting range. However, my issue is that during the manufacturing and distribution processes there happens to be a lot of loopholes which never get plugged. They try to regulate it, but that regulation just is not as tight as it should be.

Let me offer an overly simplified example:

Step 1: 50 handguns get shipped from point A to point B.
Step 2: 48 of these guns arrive at point B even though 50 are expected.
Step 3: Point B contacts point A and says wtf?
Step 4: Point A says something to the effect of "Oh! We only meant to ship 48. Please fix your records on your end. I will have someone on my end check up on this issue."
Step 5: The person at Point A is in on the scam and is getting a cut from the money which is made by selling those 2 "lost" handguns illegally. He fixes everything up so it looks nice and neat.

Now, before some of you rush in here and quote me with your titty fits, understand that I realize that there are policies and procedures which are set in place which are meant to prevent this kind of nonsense from happening. The problem here is not the policies and how they are intended to work. The problem is the regulation of those policies. The problem is the shady people involved within the industry who cover up these kinds of "mistakes". These weapons tend to exchange hands far too often which is one of the leading causes for these kinds of issues that result in more guns falling into the hands of people that should not have them.

A better (and more common) example is:
A) Convicted, mentally unstable violent felon goes to a gun show
B) Said felon purchases a .45 auto without any background verification
C) Felon uses weapon to commit violent crime

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
I'm not really a pro-gun control type, but you pro-gun people really do say stupid things when it comes to debating the issue.

Funny, those of who defend our 2nd amendment rights think the same of gun-grabbers.

So, you've never heard a pro-gun argument and though, "dear god that was stupid. Sure I like my guns but that particular statement was plain stupid."

Or do you think anybody who disagrees with your position is stupid?

Not everybody. There are people with well-reasoned arguments against guns. None of them visit this forum.

Elaborate.

I have no idea, they're not my arguments. I only know that none of them visit this forum. The only anti-gun people here are the radical, emotional nutjobs.

 

[NeoV]

-- The rate of firearm deaths among children under age 15 is far higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. "We have many more handguns and much weaker gun laws than any other country," says Harvard Professor David Hemenway, who has worked to develop strategies to combat illegal firearms.

But really, all is well, nothing to see here - we...um, have this non-homogeneous population you see.....and, um...our drug laws stink....but we don't have a gun problem....

 

[wwswimming]

1: The government specifically grants every citizen the right to bear arms for personal defense AND for defense from the government.

actually i think there's some people in Washington who are a bit un-clear about that second part.

i dare say that, when they passed HR 1955 & 1959 (or maybe it's a Senate Resolution ?), they got even more un-clear about that second part (right to bear arms for defense against the government).

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: NeoV
-- The rate of firearm deaths among children under age 15 is far higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. "We have many more handguns and much weaker gun laws than any other country," says Harvard Professor David Hemenway, who has worked to develop strategies to combat illegal firearms.

But really, all is well, nothing to see here - we...um, have this non-homogeneous population you see.....and, um...our drug laws stink....but we don't have a gun problem....

Those numbers include criminal activity, suicides, etc. Just FYI. Also, the suicide attempted and successful rate is lower in America than in many other nations, despite the availability of guns.

For instance, In 1997, the National Center for Health Statistics reported 672 firearm-related deaths among persons under the age of 15. Now take out the criminal activity and suicides and compare the remaining number against other preventable forms of death in that age group and you'll see what I mean.

Now, that study and those based on it also included Hong Kong as a country, and considers Kuwait as one of the 'industrialized' countries. In other words, it cherry picked to get the results it wanted.

Not saying it's not sad, but it's really not particularly significant when compared with other problems, or against the enormous good that firearms do.