Irresponsible gun owners (Page 4)

With all due respect, what you just described would incite civil war in the United States and lead to the deaths of countless people.

 I will respectfully have to throw the BS flag. You do not own an AR-15.

I'd just like to point out that despite our "lax gun laws" the US is still a VERY safe place to live.  Look at the murder rate per capita for all countries.  Click the rate column to sort by # of murders per 100,000 residents.  Now scroll WAY down to the US at 4.2 per 100,000 (#100ish by my quick count).  You have a better chance of being murdered in Greenland, the US & British VI, and Jamaica than the US.

Many of the countries above the US have much stricter gun laws.  When some ones wants to kill someone else the lack of a gun is not going to make a difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country

Sudafed is traced nationally guns are not. It is harder to get sudafed than a semiautomatic weapon. This is preposterous.

2nd amendment speaks of having a well regulated militia - a well trained militia. All you gun owners - what militia are you in? The founding fathers put it there over fear of government - 

In 2006 Israel stopped having soldiers take their guns home with them - the suicide rate dropped dramatically. Suicidal thoughts continued - but they pass - when there is access to a weapon it does not and life ends.

There is NO REASON for semi automatic and automatic weapons to be sold to anyone  who is not military or police.

I think we should follow Japan's way: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/ 

It is now a public health issue

I guess the rest of the country is talking about it, so we might as well.

Tony, seriously, if you can come up with "common sense" gun control that will actually "prevent" someone from killing people, I'm all ears. It's easy to just say well do this and do that... but put your self in the shoes of a determined person... there is nothing you can do from stopping me from doing what I want. I'm really not trying to be flip, I'm being sincere.

The mental illness thing has come up before, but it isn't as easy as it sounds. Not necessarily disagreeing with you that it is a good idea to not allow guns to mentally unstable people... but it get's tricky. First you have to be deemed to have a mental illness. Then the courts have to get involved and legally adjudicated mentally ill. Then you have to determine what is going to keep somone from their rights, and what they will have to do to get them back.... this is all assuming the person has broken no laws, just caught the attention of mental health proffessionals. As it stands right now... a person legally adjudicated to be mentally deficient, can not purchase a fire arm. Right now, that's the law. It's the mental health people that are having a hard time denying someone their rights because of "depression" or illness... not the NRA.

Felons already can't buy guns. But a felon that wants a gun to comit a crime already knows where to buy one and already does not care about breaking the law buying one black market.

The next problem is forget gun shows and the non existent "loop hole"... the Federal government can't regulate private sales. We can buy and sell things to each other no problem all day long. The only catch is I can't "knowingly" sell a firearm to a known felon... or any other reason you can't buy one. So that is another problem.

But the last two events the person didn't even own the guns... they just stole them. Laws only stop law abiding citizens from doing harm, because we have agreed that is the way we want to live. Laws do nothing to stop those that don't care. They only serve to punish once the crime has been comitted.

And honestly... the laws that do get passed... well I'll follow them, because I'm a law abiding citizen. I'll still be OK if you take them from me. My life won't change much. I doubt I will declare war. But I'm not the guy that is the problem. If we can actually stop the ones that are, then I am 100% for it. But there just isn't.

63% of internet sales that happened out of NY those selling knew that the person buying would not pass a background check

smh

I'm sorry, but this post doesn't even make sense.  It's most certainly harder to get a gun than it is to purchase Sudafed.  Everyone has to get a background check to purchase a gun legally.  In fact the system actually WORKED with the shooter yesterday because he tried to purchase a gun legally and was denied:  http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495

From what it sounds like he ended up taking his guns from his mom illegally which wouldn't have been prevented by any gun control laws that anyone is proposing.

You kind of contradict yourself with Israel and Japan.  Israel suicides go down because they stop taking guns home, but Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, almost double the US.  Pick a team, because if gun ownership follows suicide then those contradict each other.

I may actually be in disagreement with some of my fellow Pro-Gun types here on BT, but I don't think there is ANY correlation to gun ownership and murder or suicide.  It is 100% related to the society we live in.  Look at these numbers:

Russia's Murder Rate: 14.9 per 100,000 people <------ Strict gun control
Finland's Murder Rate: 2.17 per 100,00 people <------- Lax gun control
Switzerland's Murder Rate: 1.01 per 100.000 people <-------- Lax gun control
United States' Murder Rate: 5.0 per 100.000 people <----- Lax gun control
United Kingdom's Murder Rate: 1.28 per 100.000 people <------ Strict gun control

If gun ownership caused more murders then these numbers should all go up and down based on the percentage of gun ownerships and they don't.  I would even go so far to say that if we removed 100% of guns from the US that the murder rate would barely budge.

You mean a public health problem like the tons and tons of illegal drugs that flow across our borders every day that an out right war on for decades has done nothing to stop? If you can't keep weed off the street, how exactly do you think you are going to stop guns?

I am more than happy to listen to an actually viable law that is actually enforcable and would actually prevent people from killing people, but I have not heard one yet. Murder is in fact against the law.

Perhaps a different way of looking at the "gun" situation?  figure out a way to make it harder to get the ammo.  without the ammo, guns (people that is) can't do stupid crap.  we'll never get the guns away and we'll never get ammo away either because the sick ficks of the world will figure out ways to get them.  oh, and make our prison system a much more terrible place to be for people who committ the violent crimes as well.

just ranting with two pennies

from Washington Post  - 12 facts - not all being shown here

gun laws DO work:

61 mass shootings and most weapons obtained LEGALLY:

Israel and Switzerland are not gun toting utopias

We are the most violent developed nation:

 More guns tend to mean more homicide.

The Harvard Injury Control Research Center assessed the literature on guns and homicide and found that there’s substantial evidence that indicates more guns means more murders. This holds true whether you’re looking at different countries or different states. 

and finally

5 Lies the Gun Lobby (and many here) tell

oh, and concealed carry does not solve the issue - that has been analyzed:

More Guns, More Mass Shootings

Please.... tell me some common sense gun control that will stop people from killing people. Try to make it enforceable, try to at least allow law abiding citizens to keep their rights, and try to make it actually effective and not just give you a warm and fuzzy because a law is in a book on a shelf. 

Nobody said it has... but if you are trying to actually make the case more CCW equals more mass murders...  wow.

I linked to the article about Japan several posts ago - from the article:

To get a gun in Japan, first, you have to attend an all-day class and pass a written test, which are held only once per month. You also must take and pass a shooting range class. Then, head over to a hospital for a mental test and drug test (Japan is unusual in that potential gun owners must affirmatively prove their mental fitness), which you'll file with the police. Finally, pass a rigorous background check for any criminal record or association with criminal or extremist groups, and you will be the proud new owner of your shotgun or air rifle. Just don't forget to provide police with documentation on the specific location of the gun in your home, as well as the ammo, both of which must be locked and stored separately. And remember to have the police inspect the gun once per year and to re-take the class and exam every three years

no that is the title of the article

in the article which I guess you don't want to bother reading, they tell what has happened to all the heroes who think they will just take out the shooter (hint they don't)

gee why do we have any laws then?

moderators is this really appropriate? discussion is fine but calling me  or anyone else stupid is just ridiculous

You seem to insinuate that the cause of the mass shootings is because there are more guns on the street.  Hence you want to reduce the guns on the street because I'm guessing you feel that will then reduce mass shootings.

Here's a recent example that you'll never see on national news of a CCW potentially saving many lives and contributing to the end of a mass shooting.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/12/daniel-zimmerman/clackamas-shooter-confronted-by-ccw-holder/

I'm all for effective laws, but the last thing we want is a knee jerk reaction based on a tragic event that has no effect on the end result and even makes it worse.  You "feel" that more gun control will reduce them, but I "feel" that more gun control will not reduce them and could potentially make them worse if law abiding citizens are not allowed the option to defend themselves.

Oh, and all debate on this issue aside, I personally feel your passion on this topic and think that you have the best intentions.  You want to protect people and the violence to stop.  I share that sentiment and don't think you're stupid. 

either you just did not bother to read, or your reading comprehension is sorely lacking.  From the article:

we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 61 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public. And in recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed.

Australia and Japan refute your feelings

I would think that someone in your profession, part of the hospital and medical community which contributes to 100 of thousands of unnecessary deaths each year would be more concerned about the profession you are in and NOT one which you have proven countless times you are ignorant of. Not to mention the obscene amount of unnecessary pharmaceutical drugs prescribed by physicians that contribute to the decline of our society.

Yes I am a little tired of you and your seemingly joyful exploitation of the tragedies of others to promote your misguided political agenda.

To the best of my knowledge these mass shooting all occur in "gun free zones". Places the government at the urging or people like you have seen fit to forbid people to protect themselves from gun wielding lunatics.