quade 4 #26 November 9, 2009 QuoteHowever, when discussing the topic of mass shootings and other mass killings, the norm is for the murder to choose a location where victims cannot defend themselves. I disagree. 99% of the time they have a beef with a specific person or group of individuals in the facility. Usually it's the boss that fired them or the kids that made fun of them.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tokter 0 #27 November 9, 2009 QuoteInternational Correlation between gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide.' Professor Martin Killias, May 1993. http://www.gun-control-network.org/International.gif I think that graph shows that more guns do not make you safer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #28 November 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteInternational Correlation between gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide.' Professor Martin Killias, May 1993. http://www.gun-control-network.org/International.gif I think that graph shows that more guns do not make you safer. You think that, but your graph only shows correlation. The graph is a snapshot - it doesn't show the growing numbers of guns in the US with no change in deaths over the past few decades. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #29 November 9, 2009 Wow, fewer firearms available correlates with fewer firearms deaths. Shocker. Why do people who area afraid of firearms woory so much more about firearms deaths than other deaths. I'd be far more interested if that chart compared firearms numbers to overall murder and suicide numbers. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #30 November 9, 2009 QuoteNow, I KNOW Michael Moore gets a bad rap for his film "Bowling for Columbine", but have you ever actually seen it? Yes i have. He speaks about the mentality and mentions how Canada has more guns but less violence. Among a lot of other stuff. until you can prove to me that no one will ever want to harm me or my fellow men and woman the argument is pointless. These things don't happen often but they do happen a lot more then lightning striking a man. look how many murders we have. Again you have an opinion on it fine, however your opinion seems to be avoiding the facts. There will always be bad people who will hurt others for no reason, and there will always be criminals who will get guns regardless of the law.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #31 November 9, 2009 Quote Hey I am always carrying a concealed friendly weapon. Well, usually it is concealed, unless it is needed to help a woman this is my rifle, this is my gun!!-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #32 November 9, 2009 Quote .... Why do people who area afraid of firearms woory so much more about firearms deaths than other death. I'd be far more interested if that chart compared firearms numbers to overall murder and suicide numbers. Why??? You really ask THAT? Even the very last idiot knows how quick weapons kill. Is it that wonderful to walk in the streets beeing aware that every step could be the last? The neighbour next door lost control of his temper and is shooting like a fool? You gun lovers really lost "ground grip". dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #33 November 9, 2009 Quote I'd be far more interested if that chart compared firearms numbers to overall murder and suicide numbers. Suicide shouldn't count because that's not a threat against you and therefore has no bearing on whether or not you carry a gun for defense purposes. The only things that should count are violent crimes committed against another person that involve a weapon of any type and accidental deaths caused by having the weapon around.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #34 November 9, 2009 QuoteRon, there are fewer shootings in "Gun Free Zones" in my neighborhood than there were before they where instituted. I'm sorry if you can't see they actually do work, but they do. Of COURSE they do... because a person that's going to SHOOT someone else is going to just give up and go home because of a sign that says "Gun Free Zone". Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #35 November 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteRon, there are fewer shootings in "Gun Free Zones" in my neighborhood than there were before they where instituted. I'm sorry if you can't see they actually do work, but they do. Of COURSE they do... because a person that's going to SHOOT someone else is going to just give up and go home because of a sign that says "Gun Free Zone". How can somebody that claims to spend as much time as you do at the range be so consistently off target? Do you not see how that, at the very least, forces a person at the facility that gets into an argument to take a few minutes to reconsider and gives other people in authority time to react to threats rather than having an instantaneous escalation of violence and crime of passion? No. Of course not. You can ONLY see it as a target for a random person that has no connection to the facility whatsoever. That rarely happens.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 November 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteRon, there are fewer shootings in "Gun Free Zones" in my neighborhood than there were before they where instituted. I'm sorry if you can't see they actually do work, but they do. Of COURSE they do... because a person that's going to SHOOT someone else is going to just give up and go home because of a sign that says "Gun Free Zone". How can somebody that claims to spend as much time as you do at the range be so consistently off target? Do you not see how that, at the very least, forces a person at the facility that gets into an argument to take a few minutes to reconsider and gives other people in authority time to react to threats rather than having an instantaneous escalation of violence and crime of passion? No. Of course not. You can ONLY see it as a target for a random person that has no connection to the facility whatsoever. That rarely happens. Oh, please - pull the other leg, it has bells attached. Show me ONE time that 'no guns' signage has PREVENTED a gun crime. Just ONCE.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #37 November 9, 2009 Show me ONE TIME that a "Do not walk on the grass" sign has EVER prevented ANYONE from walking on the grass! Sigh . . . you're being silly. Sure, some idiots will still walk on the grass. However, that doesn't mean it doesn't make at least some people stop and think about alternative routes RATHER than walking on the grass. You're asking to prove a negative. That's just silly.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tokter 0 #38 November 9, 2009 Quote Wow, fewer firearms available correlates with fewer firearms deaths. Shocker. I know, crazy. Yet this whole thread is about how more guns would prevent them from beeing used And no I'm not afraid of firearms, I used to have an automatic assault rifle and shot hundreds of rounds with it, like most swiss men. A gun is about as much of a deterrent of murder as the death penalty is. Which seems to work really well... [/sarcasm] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #39 November 9, 2009 QuoteShow me ONE TIME that a "Do not walk on the grass" sign has EVER prevented ANYONE from walking on the grass! Sigh . . . you're being silly. Sure, some idiots will still walk on the grass. However, that doesn't mean it doesn't make at least some people stop and think about alternative routes RATHER than walking on the grass. You're asking to prove a negative. That's just silly. You're asking me to believe that someone who's already decided to commit a crime is going to reconsider because of a sign, and you're calling ME silly?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #40 November 9, 2009 Quote You're asking to prove a negative. That's just silly. No sillier than your unfounded assertion that the signage works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #41 November 9, 2009 QuoteQuote You're asking to prove a negative. That's just silly. No sillier than your unfounded assertion that the signage works. Understand that any posted "Gun Free Zone" is more than just signage.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #42 November 9, 2009 QuoteQuote .... Why do people who area afraid of firearms woory so much more about firearms deaths than other death. I'd be far more interested if that chart compared firearms numbers to overall murder and suicide numbers. Why??? You really ask THAT? Even the very last idiot knows how quick weapons kill. Is it that wonderful to walk in the streets beeing aware that every step could be the last? The neighbour next door lost control of his temper and is shooting like a fool? You gun lovers really lost "ground grip". No, the grip lost is yours. All studies show that those legally permitted to carry are statistically shown to be MORE law abiding. Yes, there are exceptions to everything however, your point is more exaggeration than any kind of fact or stat"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #43 November 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote You're asking to prove a negative. That's just silly. No sillier than your unfounded assertion that the signage works. Understand that any posted "Gun Free Zone" is more than just signage. Understand that someone that is already determined to commit armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon or first degree murder probably isn't going to be too concerned about a felony conviction for carrying a weapon in a prohibited place - as shown by such as Cho, Hasan, Rodriguez et al....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #44 November 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote You're asking to prove a negative. That's just silly. No sillier than your unfounded assertion that the signage works. Understand that any posted "Gun Free Zone" is more than just signage. I'm translating this to "I have no response to post #22 in this thread." Mass murderers don't really worry about minor felony charges. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #45 November 10, 2009 Right. And I'm NOT just talking about mass murders. I'm talking about the far more common event of an argument escalating to violence which is something a "Gun Free Zone" does in fact address. Less access to the weapon gives the person a chance to think about the consequences. As for the case of a person that is intent on causing mass murders, that very rarely happens in the first place. The Walter Mitty / Rambo fantasy of a person, such as yourself, being present and stopping it is just that. While it's true that there have been occasions of it happening is not really an good reason for arming the populace and doing away with "Gun Free Zones." Look at the entire picture and not just the Walter Mitty fantasy.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #46 November 10, 2009 QuoteRight. And I'm NOT just talking about mass murders. I'm talking about the far more common event of an argument escalating to violence which is something a "Gun Free Zone" does in fact address. Less access to the weapon gives the person a chance to think about the consequences. And a person that is going to obey the no guns sign isn't likely to be the type of person that's going to whip out a piece and kill someone in a fit of anger in the first place. QuoteAs for the case of a person that is intent on causing mass murders, that very rarely happens in the first place. The Walter Mitty / Rambo fantasy of a person, such as yourself, being present and stopping it is just that. While it's true that there have been occasions of it happening is not really an good reason for arming the populace and doing away with "Gun Free Zones." Look at the entire picture and not just the Walter Mitty fantasy. The only person putting the "Walter Mitty fantasy" forward...is YOU.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #47 November 10, 2009 QuoteI'm talking about the far more common event of an argument escalating to violence I think most people know the difference between an argument and a valid reason to take lethal action. Again we should not make laws for the lowest common denominator. Most people know that you don't just kill someone for an argument. Does it happen yes, but again people drive drunk as well should we ban cars. I don't get that way of thinking. To deny that violent crime happens to good people, to deny how many murders have actually occurred in gun free zones, and to deny people there god given, nature given whatever given right to protect there lives is ridiculous. Do you ever think that maybe your on the wrong side of this argument? Not trying to be a dick, but just common sense should prove the point. 1. Are there bad people? Yes 2. Do i have the right to protect my self and loved ones? Yes 3. Whats the best defence against an armed gun man ? another armed gun man/woman How do you answer these questions above?.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #48 November 10, 2009 My point in replying to you is that I don't understand why people focus on firearms attacks and murders instead of all attack and murders. People killed by knives, cars, and pointy sticks are still just as dead. If Buford Furrow hadn't used a gun, would we care about him? I suggest that people who want to ban guns would not. Afterall, how many people, even those who study mass killings, know the name of Steven Abrams? (of Southcoast Early Childhood Learning Center fame, in Costa Mesa, Calif) Anyone who knows anything about mass murder knows about the Jewish Daycare/Community Center shooting in L.A. Who's ever heard of the SECLC daycare in Costa Mesa? I was at teh scene of a pencil murder not long ago. That's right, pencil. The killer attacked his victim with another weapon, and when the weapon was disabled, the killer grabbed a pencil and killed the victim. Is the victim any less dead? My question to you is simple: Do you think removing all guns from the USA would have much effect on the violent attack and homicide rates?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #49 November 10, 2009 QuoteQuote .... Why do people who area afraid of firearms woory so much more about firearms deaths than other death. I'd be far more interested if that chart compared firearms numbers to overall murder and suicide numbers. Why??? You really ask THAT? Even the very last idiot knows how quick weapons kill. Is it that wonderful to walk in the streets beeing aware that every step could be the last? The neighbour next door lost control of his temper and is shooting like a fool? You gun lovers really lost "ground grip". Well I guess I'm less than the very last idiot. Knives kill. Cars are used in homicides. Google "Steven Abrams" and "Southcoast Early Childhood Learning Center." Hell, pencils and dumbbells are used to kill people. Should we ban all those things? Some people kill others with their bare hands. Should we all have fluffy mittens surgically attached at birth? Who gives a damn what the murderer uses to kill his victims? It is a horrible crime and should be punished.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #50 November 10, 2009 QuoteQuoteRight. And I'm NOT just talking about mass murders. I'm talking about the far more common event of an argument escalating to violence which is something a "Gun Free Zone" does in fact address. Less access to the weapon gives the person a chance to think about the consequences. And a person that is going to obey the no guns sign isn't likely to be the type of person that's going to whip out a piece and kill someone in a fit of anger in the first place. That's not true. The immediate availability of a gun absolutely has an influence on murder rates. People are FAR more likely to be murdered with a gun in their own home by someone they know than ever be murdered in a location where guns are not allowed.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites