Gun-toting soccer mom, husband found shot dead

hollow bottle

Absolutely wrong Commy! That is such typical response. And why don't you answer the questions that you asked?

http://gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

hollow bottle

"Get rid of guns, get rid of gun crime." You must be joking. Right? Did you really post that? Maybe I'm dreaming.

TriumphantAngel

bump for the fuddinator

Dear Dunkman,
Please show up to the board today and read this thread. It's "important".
It would also be appreciated if you could bring your A game like you did when you debated this issue with charger last year.
one of the best debates ever.

So uh yeah

Hugs.

gimmesometruth27

hollow bottle wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

hollow bottle wrote:

We should take away all sharp objects, ropes and decon too. My smile keeps me safe.

i am certain that in america at least, guns kill more people than any of those things. think about it.

My point is that guns are not the problem. They can save innocent peoples lives. I worked in North Philly for 5 years and it changed my view on gun laws as I was for strict laws. The thugs are all armed, mostly illegally. I now don't see a problem with having a pistol. Good people get murdered all the time. In those areas, the chances of being victimized are scarry. More laws will never take guns out of the hands of those who are using them for criminal activities, never. Furthermore, accidents resulting from guns has been decreasing exponentially while gun ownership has been largely increasing.

i will bet you $5000 that you can not find more news stories or any other examples of guns saving more lives than taking lives. there are on average 5 news stories in my local paper per day of people being murdered by guns. i am not talking body count, i am talking different INCIDENTS of murder by gun. and i live in a relatively safer large midwestern city. even if a cop or vigilante shoots and kills someone, someone still died by gun violence. no pro gun website can dispute that.

so the thugs are armed, are you proposing solving the problem by having more guns out in the population? it is a recipe for disaster. its like saying "hey, iran has wmds, lets make the entire region safer by giving EVERYONE some nerve gas or nukes..."

you say more laws will not get the guns out of the hands of criminals. that is true, but gun buyback programs have been proven to be successful in limiting the number of illegal guns on the street. there are other ways to solve problems than by passing more laws.

lastly, i would like to see some actual stats on your claim that gun accidents are down, because in the papers i read they are actually up with the increased number of guns in the population. and i doubt that that is due to liberal media bias.

Commy

hollow bottle wrote:

"Get rid of guns, get rid of gun crime." You must be joking. Right? Did you really post that? Maybe I'm dreaming.

how do you commit a gun crime without a gun?

Cosmo

rebornFixer wrote:

I will say that there is something to keeping guns out of the hands of otherwise law-abiding mentally troubled individuals, though ... Presumably in this case there is some reason to believe that depression or another psychological problem was playing a role.

...
But... weren't they 'Law Abiding Citizens' when they bought the guns? Law abiding citizens get depressed... depression can happen to anyone... even you. Anyone can break under the stress... losing a job, breaking up of a marriage... a lot of stuff. Having a gun handy in good times sounds logical... a gun in the house in turmoil? Well... my logic tells me... not so much.

rebornFixer

Cosmo wrote:

...
But... weren't they 'Law Abiding Citizens' when they bought the guns? Law abiding citizens get depressed... depression can happen to anyone... even you. Anyone can break under the stress... losing a job, breaking up of a marriage... a lot of stuff. Having a gun handy in good times sounds logical... a gun in the house in turmoil? Well... my logic tells me... not so much.

As an aside, I can't believe someone called dunkman out to this thread. You know, masochism is treatable.
Seriously, though ... We haven't all heard his rigid views on gun ownership 1000s of times before? Hey, look, a fire ... Maybe this gasoline will help? fuck.

Cosmo,
You raise good points, and yes, I know what depression feels like, first hand. I also own two guns (legally). I know that there's no black and white solution to the guns and mental health issue, but stats show that owning a gun (legal or illegal) is a risk factor for completed suicide, if you are are male with serious mental health issues. In my view, this sort of finding needs attention. Maybe firearms permits should require regular updates or renewals? Not sure what the best solution would be. I'll also add that lack of a gun will not likely prevent a motivated person from killing himself. Suicide rates remain distressingly high in places where guns are less readily available and not part of the cultural fabric.

TriumphantAngel

rebornFixer wrote:

As an aside, I can't believe someone called dunkman out to this thread. You know, masochism is treatable.
Seriously, though ... We haven't all heard his rigid views on gun ownership 1000s of times before? Hey, look, a fire ... Maybe this gasoline will help? fuck.

You're edgy today rebornFixer. Do you need a hug?

And as for Dunks 'rigid' views, well, i guess it depends on which side of the fence you sit on in relation to the isssue. I don't see his views as rigid, I'm on the same page as him, and believe tougher gun regulations have to be enforced.

Commy

hollow bottle wrote:

Absolutely wrong Commy! That is such typical response. And why don't you answer the questions that you asked?

http://gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

i must have missed them., what questions?

g under p

TriumphantAngel wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

As an aside, I can't believe someone called dunkman out to this thread. You know, masochism is treatable.
Seriously, though ... We haven't all heard his rigid views on gun ownership 1000s of times before? Hey, look, a fire ... Maybe this gasoline will help? fuck.

You're edgy today rebornFixer. Do you need a hug?

And as for Dunks 'rigid' views, well, i guess it depends on which side of the fence you sit on in relation to the isssue. I don't see his views as rigid, I'm on the same page as him, and believe tougher gun regulations have to be enforced.

Tougher gun laws or not this country has to do something to avoid hideous incidents like this one in Massachusetts. Maybe mandatory gun shooting and handling lessons for any gun purchase, like you in trying to obtain a drivers license.

Criminal Charges in Death of Boy Who Shot Himself at Gun Show

Peace

OffHeGoes29

Usually, peopl who are anti-gun grew up in safe areas with zero experience shooting or being around a weapon. I ask people if they are so anti gun, they should educated themselves and go shooting or take a safety course just once before they take that position. If they're still anti-gun after that, then they have something to back their point.

blackredyellow

I'd be anti-hand gun if there was any sort of way of getting ALL hand guns out of everyone's hands (including criminals). Since there isn't any way to do that, I don't agree with not allowing law abiding people (with background checks, training, etc) to own them.

rebornFixer

blackredyellow wrote:

I'd be anti-hand gun if there was any sort of way of getting ALL hand guns out of everyone's hands (including criminals). Since there isn't any way to do that, I don't agree with not allowing law abiding people (with background checks, training, etc) to own them.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel about the situation.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Usually, peopl who are anti-gun grew up in safe areas with zero experience shooting or being around a weapon. I ask people if they are so anti gun, they should educated themselves and go shooting or take a safety course just once before they take that position. If they're still anti-gun after that, then they have something to back their point.

I live in the once-murder capital of Canada. I don't own a gun. Never shot one. Never had the urge to shoot one. I don't want to kill a living thing, so why would I want to? What would shooting a gun do to make me have a logical point? I think guns are for idiots, making me shoot one at a coke can or a paper target won't change that opinion. Tell me how it would?

A good friend of mine goes hunting all the time. We always get into arguments over why he feels the need to do this. He can go to the store and get his own meat. He shoots for sport. I just can't wrap my head around that nonsense. KILLING A LIVING THING FOR FUN. What the fuck is wrong with the world that you'd end the life of an innocent, beautiful animal, possibly orphaning their young, for YOUR AMUSEMENT? How sick do you have to be to do that?

I think that guns are fine in the hands of a 100% responsible human. Problem is, that doesn't exist. Humans are egotistical and self-centred by nature. That's how the gun was invented in the first place. Pure human idiocy and arrogance.

No, I'm not a vegetarian either. I eat steak and burgers all the time. I am not an animal activist by any stretch. I just think killing things for fun is as low as you can get.

And the person who made the point about "well since Iran has nukes, we'd better get bigger nukes so we can all live in peace" is bang on. It makes no sense at all.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

rebornFixer wrote:

blackredyellow wrote:

I'd be anti-hand gun if there was any sort of way of getting ALL hand guns out of everyone's hands (including criminals). Since there isn't any way to do that, I don't agree with not allowing law abiding people (with background checks, training, etc) to own them.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel about the situation.

No amount of background checks or training can prevent accidental deaths. 0. Nada. Zilch.

OffHeGoes29

Johnny Sitar wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

blackredyellow wrote:

I'd be anti-hand gun if there was any sort of way of getting ALL hand guns out of everyone's hands (including criminals). Since there isn't any way to do that, I don't agree with not allowing law abiding people (with background checks, training, etc) to own them.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel about the situation.

No amount of background checks or training can prevent accidental deaths. 0. Nada. Zilch.

See now if you had some sort of formal training you would know its physically impossible to have an accident with a gun if you follow the rules of a responsible gun owner. Accidents happen when people don't follow the rules of owning and operating a weapon.

As for me, (because I'm selfcentered gun owner), I have a permit to carry a pistol. I never take it out with me, nor do I ever plan on hunting. I do however keep it with me while I hike or camp, something that I caught onto after living out west. Frankly, I avoid bad areas of town, so there isn't any reason to have it with me.

Shooting is fun, not everyone has to like it, but at least know a little about what your against before forming your opinion.

Yes, you're right, guns primary purpose is to kill, but you very well know that getting rid of them isn't going to solve the problem. And out lawing them isn't going to stop criminals from getting them, and you're not going to stop the production of them.....that will never happen.

OffHeGoes29

http://www.nrahq.org/education/guide.asp

Any and all accidents can be traced to not following one of these rules listed above. Just like driving, if everyone would follow the rules, there would be no accidents, but we still hand out drivers licenses and sell cars to people. I'm almost willing to bet that the percentage is higher for car owners to be killed in a car accident then gun owners by guns.....don't know if there is data out there for that statistic or not.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Shooting is fun, not everyone has to like it, but at least know a little about what your against before forming your opinion.

you said that again, without telling me exactly why I have to shoot a gun to know that it kills people. Do I have to try heroin to know that it's bad for me and society? I don't think so. Some may think it's fun, but I can be against it without trying it. Just like guns.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

http://www.nrahq.org/education/guide.asp

Any and all accidents can be traced to not following one of these rules listed above. Just like driving, if everyone would follow the rules, there would be no accidents, but we still hand out drivers licenses and sell cars to people. I'm almost willing to bet that the percentage is higher for car owners to be killed in a car accident then gun owners by guns.....don't know if there is data out there for that statistic or not.

and that proves my point. I said that guns would be fine as long as 100% of people were responsible 100% of the time. And we know that is not possible.

The "bad people have guns so I deserve one too" is not a logical argument, and you know it.

And the purpose of a car is not to kill someone. It's to get somewhere. You can't use that as a comparison. You could use that same analogy about pretty much anything that can be used as a weapon, but it's primary task is nothing to do with it at all. Guns were made to harm. Animals. People. Property. You cannot argue that.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

oh and, hey, while we're at it, we're never going to stop murder, rape, or any other type of crime, so let's make it all legal, since we can't stop it anyway.

good point. :?