10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down

[freeRadical]

Gary, would you be willing to put a sign in your window that states “Gun free zone” that can clearly be seen by all passers by?

The sign in my front yard says, “Trespassers will be shot on sight.”

 

[Deus_tecum]

So far in decades of life, I have never needed a seat belt, but I have them and fasten them whenever I drive. By the same token I have the means for self protection and protection of others. The only difference between that and the seat belts is that I have needed self protection before and was blessed to have it available.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

I’m not necessarily against gun ownership, but I think being “responsible” goes well beyond taking gun classes. It takes a certain individual who is highly disciplined and lacks anger, hatred, rage and severe mental illness. This does not only apply to the gun owner, but his household and personal environment as well, as family members or a friend may gain access to the gun and use it to kill themselves or some other family member. The high incidence of murder, suicides and accidental killings within the domestic settings is alarming, indeed. Gun ownership should not be a right so that any wacko can own one, but a privilege.

And I’m neither liberal or conservative.

LOVE!

Nobody lacks anger, hatred, or rage…therefore you must think nobody should have access to guns.

The mentally ill are already prohibited from possessing firearms.

The “high incidence of murder, suicides and accidental killings within the domestic setting” is not caused by the presence of firearms. For example Luxumborg, where gun ownership is totally illegal, has a murder rate nine times what nearby Germany has (Germany has a relatively high gun ownership rate of people). For another example, look at the former Soviet Union/Russia which has very low gun ownership rates, but has an extraordinarily high murder rate.

Here are those statistics (data from 2002)
Luxemborg - gun ownership 0/100,000 - Murder rate 9.01/100,000
Germany - gun ownership 30,000/100,000 - Murder rate 0.93/100,000
Former USSR- gun ownership 4,000/100,000 - Murder rate 20.53/100,000

But again, like I posted earlier, actual data/statistics do not matter to the liberal extremists because statistics/data do not do anything to help settle down the intense “feelings” that liberals have about their causes.

And lastly Robert - if you do not understand that your postings here at CAF mirror the ideology of the rabid left, then you are either incredibly stupid (which I do not believe you are), or you are completely dishonest with yourself. There is no hope for a person to seek understanding of other’s positions when they do not understand where they are, or why they are there…

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Good Afternoon Boatswain: I’m certain that you realize that while there are pockets or corruption in any system, these fall far short of a full blown government conspiracy to take a nation by force. The system has inbuilt checks and balances.

The most important check and balance of government corruption is also the last to be used, and is the messiest when used…and that is the armed rebellion of the people against the tyranny of government. I hope and pray that the other checks and balances will begin working again and armed rebellion does not happen, but I fear that it is already starting.

Mine is a first hand account. What is yours?

20 years in the military as an operator. With the increase in communications ability that cell phones and the internet give us comes an increased capability of centralization of thought/policy…leading right to the federal political party leadership. Lois Lerner is not the exception anymore, but she is the rule. Look at what Sargeant Major Barrett, the senior enlisted guy the the United States Marines, just said in support of cutting military retired pay. Look at the sheer number of senior military who have been forced into retirement under the current administration simply because they disagreed with the political leadership.

That’s the good thing about our system. The closest we ever came to the National Socialist upheaval you are citing was the Tea Party takeover a few election cycles back.

That may be the single least accurate statement anybody has ever posted on any internet forum anywhere since the creation of the internet. Furthermore, it shows that you personally have ZERO understanding of the tea party movement.

Let me school you on the basics of the tea party movement. TEA stands for Taxed Enough Already. The fundamental belief of the tea party is that the federal government is too big, too intrusive, and is out of control. It is the ANTI-SOCIALIST movement.

They’re on their way out because most of them had little knowledge of constitutional law or governmental process and only caused a short disruption that is coming to an end. It’s hard to have a narrow minded agenda for very long in a world of 24 hour news cycles, Google and YouTube. Eventually people see you for what you are. The party that brought them into view is now distancing itself from these people because they know they can’t run a national candidate and hope to win with those people roosting among them.

The Tea Parties (since it is a true grassroots organization, the Tea Party movement is a diverse group of smaller groups) are certainly evolving and maturing. And they, unfortunately, have a small number of extremists who, of course, attracted the majority of media attention so that the liberal commentators could present the extremists as the spokesmen of the movement. Of course, these are the same commentators who utterly refuse to cover the Gosnell abortion/murder trial, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Philadelphia voter intimidation, IRS persecution of conservative groups, etc…

The military and police who carry guns are who you are referring to. Not people running around with guns on their own, or vigilantes. By the way, I served in uniform, and I have seen first hand what guns do to people. I have had the shattered remnants of skulls blown open by gunshot crunching under my boots, and have smelled abdominal wounds. I have seen a tongue protruding from a neck where a head used to be. I have seen a lot of things first hand, and I have earned a right to have a say in this matter.

Sure, you have the right to say what you want. However you will only maintain that right as long as good men in uniform protect you and your family from external threats, and good men without a uniform protect you and your family from the totalitarianism potential within our own government.

By the way, bullets are not good for the body, but government totalitarianism is even worse for the soul. I have seen everything you describe above, but I have also seen the absolute extremes that families will go through to escape totalitarian governments so their children will have a chance for freedom.

By the way, what do all totalitarian governments have in common? Yep, you guessed it…citizens are not allowed to be armed.

I have never offered the idea of taking weapons from the police or the military. And I was in fact one of those scary men that protected you.

And thank you for your service. Of course, the Gestapo also had the mission of “protecting” the people, especially after the people were disarmed.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

You are way more likely, whether intentionally or accidentally, either to harm or be harmed by a family member or friend with that weapon than to suffer in any way by not having it.

Six million Jews were killed in just a few years. What allowed the totalitarian government to round them up and execute them? They were first disarmed.

Same thing happened in Stalinist Russia.

Same thing happened in Mao’s China. (To a lesser degree, since the population never had much gun ownership).

Same thing happened in Cuba.

I think those numbers overwhelm the numbers harmed by family members/friends with weapons.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

-The rescue squad is also minutes away when seconds count.

-Annual Deaths In the US from Heart disease: 597,689.
Source: Center for Disease Control.

-Annual deaths from murder in the US: 16,259
Source: Center for Disease Control.

-Gun enthusiasts like to say that guns are needed for their safety. Yet, your chances of dying from a heart attack are 17 times greater than from death from an attacker.

-Cost of home defibrillator: $1,099.99 from (Amazon.com)

-Cost of AK-47 $679.00 (from Atlantic Firearms)

So why do I see gun racks in the back of pick up trucks all over your home state of Texas, and no defibrillator racks? I have to conclude that people who want to play with guns either will throw any obfuscation they can at you to justify their position, or they don’t think things through before they post.

Thank you,
Gary

More statistics that mean nothing. A very small number of these deaths from heart disease are from sudden, in the field, events that would be treatable by defibrillation. The vast majority of these deaths are due to congestive heart failure.

If you want to look at pertinent statistics on the consequences of gun control, read this study by Harvard Law School: law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Of course, like I posted earlier, no amount of actual data will change the mind of the extreme leftists because no data will ameliorate their intense “feelings” on the subject.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Nobody lacks anger, hatred, or rage…therefore you must think nobody should have access to guns.

The mentally ill are already prohibited from possessing firearms.

The “high incidence of murder, suicides and accidental killings within the domestic setting” is not caused by the presence of firearms. For example Luxumborg, where gun ownership is totally illegal, has a murder rate nine times what nearby Germany has (Germany has a relatively high gun ownership rate of people). For another example, look at the former Soviet Union/Russia which has very low gun ownership rates, but has an extraordinarily high murder rate.

Here are those statistics (data from 2002)
Luxemborg - gun ownership 0/100,000 - Murder rate 9.01/100,000
Germany - gun ownership 30,000/100,000 - Murder rate 0.93/100,000
Former USSR- gun ownership 4,000/100,000 - Murder rate 20.53/100,000

But again, like I posted earlier, actual data/statistics do not matter to the liberal extremists because statistics/data do not do anything to help settle down the intense “feelings” that liberals have about their causes.

And lastly Robert - if you do not understand that your postings here at CAF mirror the ideology of the rabid left, then you are either incredibly stupid (which I do not believe you are), or you are completely dishonest with yourself. There is no hope for a person to seek understanding of other’s positions when they do not understand where they are, or why they are there…

Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.

Are you denying these statistics? Do you have proof?

I’m mentally ill, and I’m allowed to own a gun! Do you have any proof that suggests otherwise?

Anybody prone to anger, hatred and rage ought not to own a gun.

LOVE!

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.

Are you denying these statistics? Do you have proof?

LOVE!

I would have to see the source data Robert , without all of the biased data picking that political websites always do.

Do you deny the data in the paper I linked, with its source data, that clearly show higher rates of gun ownership equals less violent crime?

 

[DMC12]

you are giving opinions from violent countries with guns, or of peaceful countries with or without guns, now how about one very violent, with a very strict gun ownership law, Mexico.

16,736 Homicides in a year.

if this country where you can’t get anything bigger than a .22 in handguns or 380 in revolver, some hunting riffles and shotguns has this high porcentage, it means that the solution is not taking away guns, it means that my opinion stands, it is by Love and education how we really fight this problem.

 

[Robert_Sock]

I would have to see the source data Robert , without all of the biased data picking that political websites always do.

Do you deny the data in the paper I linked, with its source data, that clearly show higher rates of gun ownership equals less violent crime?

Comparing the homicide rates of America to other nations, especially Russia, is dubious. Every country has its own dynamics and unique culture that contribute to homicides. I find it odd that the paper did not in include suicides and accidental shooting from a gun within the household. These are the statistics I’m most interested in.

HAPPY EASTER!

 

[Boatswain2PA]

I’m mentally ill, and I’m allowed to own a gun! Do you have any proof that suggests otherwise?

Anybody prone to anger, hatred and rage ought not to own a gun.

LOVE!

18 USC 922 is the federal statute which lists people who are prohibited from owning firearms…including those adjudicated mentally I’ll.

And again, since everyone is human, and the imperfect human condition is to be prone to anger, hatred, and wage…you are suggesting that no one be allowed to own a gun.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Comparing the homicide rates of America to other nations, especially Russia, is dubious. Every country has its own dynamics and unique culture that contribute to homicides. I find it odd that the paper did not in include suicides and accidental shooting from a gun within the household. These are the statistics I’m most interested in.

HAPPY EASTER!

I agree, it is not a perfect correlation. However the evidence bears out across every possible example that the more robust gun control laws always equal a higher violent crime rate.

Any reasonable person can see that by looking at American big cities, and the Harvard study shows it to be true across Europe as well. Of course, like I have said before, liberal extremists cannot accept these facts because they are incongruent to the intense “feelings” they experience on the subject.

 

[Robert_Sock]

18 USC 922 is the federal statute which lists people who are prohibited from owning firearms…including those adjudicated mentally I’ll.

And again, since everyone is human, and the imperfect human condition is to be prone to anger, hatred, and wage…you are suggesting that no one be allowed to own a gun.

No, I’m suggesting that there are certain levels of anger, hatred, rage and mental illness, that once reached, a person ought to be not be allowed gun ownership.

Ah, so now you’re being MUCH more specific by stating “adjudicated.” This is a very small group of the mentally ill.

LOVE!

 

[tabycat]

Thank you for your concern Annie. If someone decides to hurt me because I am non-violent, then who is it that really gets hurt? I would have no problem with a sign. There is no escaping death, so I see little point in compromising my conscience over the fear of such things. As for friends and family, it’s a mater of principle about not having guns around. They also know my positions on participating in any cycle of violence, and without my ever mentioning it, many of my friends have followed my lead over time in becoming vegetarians. I have never recommended it to any of them.

Who would get hurt? How about anyone living (or visiting you at the time) in the same house?

 

[Robert_Sock]

I agree, it is not a perfect correlation. However the evidence bears out across every possible example that the more robust gun control laws always equal a higher violent crime rate.

Any reasonable person can see that by looking at American big cities, and the Harvard study shows it to be true across Europe as well. Of course, like I have said before, liberal extremists cannot accept these facts because they are incongruent to the intense “feelings” they experience on the subject.

I do not see where your post is addressing any of the points that I made.

LOVE!

 

[tabycat]

Anybody prone to anger, hatred and rage ought not to own a gun.

LOVE!

Since most, if not all, human beings are prone to anger, hate, and rage, are you saying, because of that, nobody should have any weapons (guns, swords, knives, bows and arrows)? :doh2:

 

[Robert_Sock]

Since most, if not all, human beings are prone to anger, hate, and rage, are you saying, because of that, nobody should have any weapons (guns, swords, knives, bows and arrows)? :doh2:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11914666&postcount=392

LOVE!

 

[tabycat]

Robert, you are just as died with a arrow, or for that matter a stake, through the heart as a bullit through the heart. The only thing different is that the arrow, stake, knife, and sward are not a gun and bullits, You are still died.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Robert, you are just as died with a arrow, or for that matter a stake, through the heart as a bullit through the heart. The only thing different is that the arrow, stake, knife, and sward are not a gun and bullits, You are still died.

Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.

What about “myth #5.” Are you denying the above statistics? Do you have proof to the contrary?

LOVE!

 

[LongingSoul]

Robert, you are just as died with a arrow, or for that matter a stake, through the heart as a bullit through the heart. The only thing different is that the arrow, stake, knife, and sward are not a gun and bullits, You are still died.

The guns lethal mystique comes from the fact that it involves no personal contact with its target. Aim is highly assured, the lethal effect is highly assured and it doesn’t involved making physical contact with a great degree of force to effect the death of a target. It removes much of the natural horror that is experienced in taking away a life. If it wasn’t so ‘special’ as a weapon, it wouldn’t attract such infatuation, devotion and esteem the way it does.